r  UBRARy  ") 

I      UNIVERSITY  OF        I 
I  CALIFORNIA  I 

1^  iAN  DIEGO     J 


\ 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA,  SAN  DIEGO 


3  1822  01711  1642 


15803 


O 


Central  University  Library 

University  of  California,  San  Diego 
Please  Note:  This  item  is  subject  to  recall. 

Date  Due 


JAN  27  1534 

f  li  >i            k      i 

NUV       .1   <'■:-■' 

CI  39  (7/93)                                                                 UCSDLb. 

Digitized  by  tine  Internet  Arciiive 

in  2007  witii  funding  from 

IVIicrosoft  Corporation 


http://www.archive.org/details/earlyoppositiontOOmccliala 


m"]' 


EARLY  OPPOSITION  TO 
THOMAS  HART  BENTON 


By  C.  H.  McCLURE 

Professor  of  History 
Warrensburg  (Mo.)  State  Normal  School 


Published  by 

The  State  Historical  Society  of  Missouri 

Reprinted  from 

The  Missouri  Historical  Review 

Vol.  10,  No.  3  (April,  19 16) 

COLUMBIA,  MISSOURI 
1916 


EARLY  OPPOSITION  TO  THOMAS 
HART  BENTON. 


C.   H.   McCLURE. 


In  February,  1850,  Thomas  Hart  Benton  was  defeated 
for  reelection  to  the  Senate  of  the  United  States.  The  con- 
test in  which  Benton  lost  his  seat  in  the  Senate  has  several 
characteristics  which  make  it  stand  out  prominently  in  the 
history  of  the  State  and  of  the  Nation.  The  passage  of  the 
Jackson  resolutions  marks  a  definite  time  at  which  the  con- 
test seemed  to  begin.  Two  questions  which  later  became  of 
great  significance  to  the  entire  nation — the  right  of  Congress 
to  prohibit  slavery  in  a  territory,  and  disunion — were  the 
issues.  The  struggle  was  marked  by  one  of  the  most  spec- 
tacular and  vindictive  speaking  campaigns  in  our  history. 
The  apparent  suddenness,  the  later  significance  of  the  issues 
involved,  and  the  spectacular  nature  of  the  contest  seem  to 
have  satisfied  all  investigators  that  the  overthrow  of  Benton 
was  to  be  attributed  entirely  to  this  contest  and  the  issues 
involved  in  it.  Thus  Meigs,  Rogers,  and  Roosevelt,  the 
three  biographers  of  Benton,  agree  that  after  his  first  election 
in  1820  he  was  elected  practically  without  opposition  until 
his  defeat  in  1850;^  while  Ray  in  his  "Repeal  of  the  Missouri 
Compromise"  places  the  beginning  of  the  contest  in   1844, 

'Meigs,  Life  of  Benton,  p.  407f;  Rogers,  Life  of  Benton,  p.  36;  Roosevelt. 
Life  of  Benton,  p.  351. 

(151) 


152  MISSOURI  HISTORICAL  REVIEW. 

but  assigns  the  annexation  of  Texas  with  special  emphasis 
on  slavery  and  disunion  as  the  first  cause  of  the  Democratic 
schism  in  Missouri.^ 

The  purpose  of  this  study  is  to  find  the  real  beginnings 
of  the  opposition  to  Benton  which  culminated  in  his  over- 
throw; also  to  find  the  beginnings  of  the  factions  in  the 
Democratic  party  in  the  State  and  the  issues  upon  which 
the  division  was  made.  The  Missouri  sources  show  that 
Benton  did  have  trouble  in  being  reelected  in  1844  and  that 
there  was  a  serious  effort  to  overthrow  him;  that  the  domi- 
nant party  began  to  break  into  factions  long  before  1844  and 
that  the  break  came  upon  the  currency  question  which  was 
later  allied  to  certain  constitutional  problems;  and  finally 
that  the  Texas  issue  was  seized  upon  by  the  already  well 
organized  opposition  to  Benton,  and  effectively  used  against 
him.  This  study  attempts  to  present  these  developments 
as  they  arose;  first  the  split  upon  the  currency  issue,  then  the 
constitutional  problems  which  were  injected  into  the  contest, 
the  alignment  of  factions  in  1842  followed  by  the  open  assault 
upon  Benton,  the  contest  for  the  control  of  party  machinery, 
and  finally  the  campaign  of  1844  which  resulted  in  the  elec- 
tion of  Benton. 

BANKING  AND  CURRENCY  IN  MISSOURI,  1837-1843. 

The  purpose  of  this  study  is  to  describe  the  opposition 
to  Thomas  H.  Benton  which  attempted  and  almost  succeeded 
in  effecting  his  overthrow  in  1844  on  the  occasion  of  his  fifth 
and  last  election  to  the  United  States  Senate.  Banking  and 
currency  were  the  chief  issues  in  this  fight  against  Benton. 
Therefore,  Benton's  policy  upon  these  questions,  the  local 
Missouri  problems  connected  with  them,  and  the  legislation 
and  public  opinion  concerning  them  must  be  explained  before 
a  discussion  of  the  actual  fight  is  attempted.  Banking  and 
currency  were  national  questions  as  well  as  state  questions 
and  as  Benton's  chief  work  was  in  the  United  States  Senate 
he  looked  upon  these  questions  from  the  national  viewpoint. 
Among  those  opposed   to  the  second  United  States   Bank 

•Ray,  Repeal  of  the  Missouri  Compromise,  pp.  27-71. 


EARLY  OPPOSITION  TO  THOMAS  HART  BENTON.  153 

probably  Benton  was  the  only  leader  who  had  a  clear-cut, 
definite,  constructive,  currency  policy.  At  any  rate  he  had 
such  a  policy.  Benton's  plan  was  to  divorce  the  government 
from  all  banks,  to  provide  for  the  deposit  of  the  government 
funds  at  the  mints  and  in  subtreasuries,  and  to  encourage  the 
use  of  hard  money  in  every  possible  way.  He  believed  that 
small  notes  banished  silver  and  gold  from  circulation;  that 
they  were  easily  counterfeited  and  circulated  among  people 
not  skilled  in  detecting  counterfeit;  and  that  they  threw 
the  burdens  and  losses  of  the  paper  money  system  occasioned 
by  depreciation,  upon  the  laboring  and  small  dealing  portion 
of  the  community,  who  had  no  share  in  the  profits  of  banking 
and  should  not  be  made  to  share  its  losses.^ 

Benton  failed  to  get  his  currency  plans  adopted  by  the 
United  States  government  and  turned  to  Missouri  as  a  sort 
of  experiment  station  where  he  could  try  out  his  theories  of 
currency.  His  influence  in  the  Missouri  General  Assembly 
was  all  powerful,*  and  his  political  friends  at  Jefferson  City 
wrote,  at  least,  a  part  of  his  ideas  concerning  a  bank  into  the 
charter  of  the  Bank  of  Missouri.  One  clause  prohibited  the 
issue  of  notes  of  a  less  denomination  than  ten  dollars.  The 
capital  stock  was  to  be  five  million  dollars,  and  one-half  was 
to  be  reserved  for  the  use  of  the  State.  The  bank  was  to 
be  managed  by  a  president  and  twelve  directors.  The  presi- 
dent and  six  of  the  directors  were  to  be  elected  by  the  General 
Assembly  every  two  years.^  The  charter  provided  that  the 
bank  should  furnish  the  governor  a  statement  of  all  its  affairs 
semi-annually;  that  the  governor  should,  after  the  August 
election,  appoint  a  committee  of  three  newly  elected  members 
of  the  General  Assembly,  not  stockholders  in  the  bank,  who 
should  examine  the  bank  and  report  its  general  condition  to 
the  General  Assembly  when  it  convened;^  and  that  either 
house  of  the  General  Assembly  might  appoint  a  committee 
to  investigate  the  affairs  of  the  bank.''  The  charter  also 
contained  the  following  clause:    "Whenever  said  bank  shall 

'Thirty  Years'  View,  I.  p.  158;  Meigs,  Life  of  Benton,  p.  260. 

*Darby,  Personal  Recollections,  p.  181, 

•Charter  of  the  Bank,  Mo.  Session  Acts,  1836-37,  pp.  12-28. 

'Ibid.,  Sec.  43. 

'Ibid.,  Sec.  55. 


154  MISSOURI  HISTORICAL  REVIEW. 

Stop  specie  payment,  the  charter  shall  cease  and  determine; 
and  it  shall  be  placed  in  the  hands  of  trustees  appointed  by 
the  governor  to  settle  the  affairs  of  the  bank."  From  the 
above  provisions  of  the  charter  of  the  bank  two  conclusions 
are  evident;  first,  that  the  governor  and  General  Assembly 
thru  the  power  to  elect  officers,  require  statements  and 
appoint  investigating  committees,  could  control  the  general 
policy  of  the  bank;  second,  that  the  very  existence  of  the 
bank  required  that  it  should  not  suspend  specie  payment. 

On  the  9th  day  of  October,  1839,  the  banks  of  Phila- 
delphia suspended  specie  payment.  They  were  followed  by 
all  the  banks  of  the  South  and  West  except  the  Bank  of  Mis- 
souri. On  November  12th  the  directors  of  the  Bank  of 
Missouri  met  and  passed  a  resolution  "That  the  bank  will 
in  the  future  receive  from  and  pay  only  to  individuals  her  own 
notes  and  specie  or  the  notes  of  specie  paying  banks."  * 
There  was  a  general  movement  of  specie  to  the  East  and  the 
notes  of  the  Bank  of  Missouri  together  with  all  the  specie 
available  were  not  sufficient  to  meet  any  considerable  amount 
of  the  merchants'  obligations  daily  falling  due.  The  notes 
of  banks  of  other  states  formed  the  greater  part  of  the  local 
currency.  By  this  act  of  the  Bank  the  notes  of  all  suspended 
banks  lost  their  character  as  money  for  the  payment  of  debts. 
Great  excitement  was  aroused  among  the  merchantile  and 
industrial  classes.  The  emergency  was  so  great  that  several 
of  the  wealthier  citizens  offered  to  bind  themselves  legally 
to  indemnify  the  bank  for  any  loss  it  might  sustain  by  de- 
preciation of  the  notes  heretofore  received,  if  it  would  rescind 
its  action.  The  directors  of  the  bank  held  a  meeting  but 
determined  to  adhere  to  their  original  action.'  When  this 
became  known  an  indignation  meeting  was  called  and  the 
action  of  the  Bank  directors  was  severely  condemned.  Reso- 
lutions were  adopted  recommending  that  those  doing  business 
with  the  Bank  withdraw  their  deposits.  As  a  result  many 
of  the  heaviest  depositors  withdrew  their  funds  and  deposited 
them  with  some  of  the  insurance  companies  or  other  corpora- 
tions.    On  the  opposite  side  of  the  Mississippi  River  and  in 

•Scharf,  History  of  St.  Louis,  p.  1373. 
*Ibid. 


EARLY  OPPOSITION  TO  THOMAS  HART  BENTON.  155 

territory  commercially  tributary  to  St.  Louis  were  numerous 
banks,  practically  without  restrictions  and  often  disregarding 
those  which  were  provided,  issuing  a  great  amount  of  paper 
currency  of  all  denominations.^"  The  inevitable  result  fol- 
lowed. Small  foreign  bank  notes  came  in  in  large  quantities. 
Clearly,  the  commercial  needs  of  St.  Louis  together  with  the 
legal  restrictions  imposed  upon  and  by  the  Bank  of  Missouri 
created  opportunities  for  lucrative  illegal  banking.  These  op- 
portunities were  made  use  of  by  the  so-called  insurance  com- 
panies and  other  corporations  of  St.  Louis,  and  great  quan- 
tities of  cheap  fluctuating  currency  were  forced  into  circula- 
tion by  these  institutions.^^  In  the  early  forties  heavy  issues 
of  shinplasters  (warrants  issued  by  an  incorporated  political 
body,  usually  a  city  or  county)  further  complicated  the  cur- 
rency questions. ^2  There  were  now  so  many  kinds  of  paper 
money  subject  to  continual  fluctuations  that  elaborate 
quotations  of  notes  were  required,  and  brokers  had  a  rich 
harvest  in  negotiating  them.  The  business  of  these  insurance 
companies  and  brokers  was  very  profitable.  They  became 
so  strong  that,  it  seems,  they  were  enabled  largely  to  control 
the  political  leaders  as  well  as  the  press  of  both  political 
parties  in  the  city.  In  these  companies  and  their  following 
is  to  be  found  the  most  determined  and  deepseated  opposition 
to  the  aggressive  hard  money  legislative  program,  and  es- 
pecially to  Benton  who  was  recognized  by  all  as  the  leader 
of  the  movement. 

The  exclusion  from  the  State  of  this  foreign  paper  cur- 
rency became  the  chief  object  of  Benton  and  his  followers  in 
Missouri  politics.  Benton  wanted  to  test  his  hard  money 
theory  in  Missouri  but  that  was  impossible  as  long  as  cheap 
paper  money  from  other  states  could  circulate  freely.  From 
1838  to  1843  at  each  session  of  the  General  Assembly  bills 
were  introduced  for  this  purpose.  The  first  bill  was  intro- 
duced by  Redman,  of  Howard  county,  in  1838.  It  made  the 
passing  or  receiving  of  any  bank  note  or  paper  currency  of 
twenty  dollars  or  less  (Bank  of  Missouri  notes  excepted)  a 

"Knox,  History  of  Banking,  pp.  702-747. 
^\Jefferson  Inquirer,  Dec.  17,  1840. 
"Ibid.,  Dec.  30,  1841,  Feb.  24,  1842. 


156  MISSOURI  HISTORICAL  REVIEW. 

misdemeanor  with  heavy  penalties  attached.  It  also  re- 
quired all  money  brokers  or  exchange  dealers  to  pay  a  license 
of  $1,000  annually,  and  subjected  them  to  a  fine  of  $10,000 
for  violation  of  the  act.  The  bill  failed  to  pass.^^  In  1840 
Governor  Reynolds  in  his  inaugural  address  urged  the  pas- 
sage of  such  a  measure."  Following  this  recommendation 
Redman  introduced  another  currency  bill  similar  to  his  former 
one,  but  without  such  severe  penalties.  However,  any 
citizen  who  passed  paper  currency  was  liable  to  the  amount 
passed.  This  bill  passed  the  House  but  in  the  Senate  was 
postponed  until  the  next  Legislature  by  a  majority  of  one 
vote.^^  In  1842,  Houston,  of  Lincoln  County,  introduced 
two  bills  for  the  purpose  of  correcting  the  currency  troubles. 
These  bills  again  prohibited  the  passing  of  paper  currency, 
and  any  one  asking  a  license  for  any  trade  or  profession,  or 
qualifying  for  public  office  was  required  to  take  an  oath  that 
he  had  not  violated  this  law.  These  bills  were  buried  in 
committee  and  in  their  place  two  bills  were  reported  back 
by  C.  F.  Jackson.  These  Jackson  bills  did  not  make  the 
passing  or  receiving  of  paper  currency  by  an  ordinary  citizen 
unlawful  as  the  previous  bills  had  sought  to  do.  They  con- 
fined their  penalties  to  corporations,  money  lenders,  and 
exchange  brokers.  These  bills  passed  February  17th  and 
23rd,  1843.16 

The  authorship  of  or  at  least  the  responsibility  for  these 
bills  which  he  never  denied  was  brought  home  to  Benton 
in  the  following  manner.  Edward  Bates,^^  of  St.  Louis,  later 
Attorney  General  in  Lincoln's  Cabinet,  in  answer  to  a  letter 
of  inquiry  from  the  Palmyra  Whig,  wrote  that  it  was  generally 
understood  that  Benton  was  the  author  of  the  Redman  bill 
of  1838,  but  that  he  had  no  definite  knowledge  relative  to  the 
matter.  However,  he  knew  that  Benton  was  the  author  of 
the  Houston  bills.  Houston  had  told  him  that  Benton  had 
written  the  bills  and  that  afterwards  he  (Bates)  had  seen  the 

"Redman  bill;  Printed  in  The  Missouri  Register,  Apr.  9,  1844. 
"Inaugural  Address,  House  Journal,  1840,  pp.  28-33. 
^*Missouri  Register,  Feb.  25,  1841. 
"Afo.  Session  Acts,  1842-43. 

'^Columbia  Statesman,  Feb.  23,  1844.     The  letter  of  Bates  is  copied  from 
the  Palmyra  Whig. 


EARLY  OPPOSITION  TO  THOMAS  HART  BENTON.  157 

original  copies  in  Benton's  hand  writing  in  Houston's  office 
in  Troy.  After  the  appearance  of  Bates'  letter,  the  Mis- 
sourian,  the  Benton  paper  of  St.  Louis,  made  the  following 
comment:  "It  is  perfectly  well  known  that  Col.  Benton 
wrote  letters  and  sent  drafts  of  his  bills  to  his  friends  at 
Jefferson  City,  to  let  them  see  precisely  what  his  ideas  were. 
Those  letter  and  bills  were  not  secrets,  but  were  frank  and 
free  communications,  for  the  inspection  of  all  who  chose  to 
see  them.  They  were  seen  and  read  generally  and  with 
more  or  less  alteration  were  adopted  and  presented  by  mem- 
bers." These  bills  were  designated  as  "Bills  of  Pains  and 
Penalties"  by  the  Whig  and  Anti-Benton,  or  Soft  Demo- 
cratic, press.  This  expression  and  "test  oathes,"  referring 
to  the  oaths  required  by  the  Houston  bills,  became  the  chief 
campaign  slogans  of  the  opposition  to  Benton. 

CONSTITUTIONAL   QUESTIONS. 

The  question  of  currency  was  the  really  vital  political 
issue  upon  which  the  opposition  to  Benton  arose  in  Missouri. 
Other  questions  were  dragged  in,  but  the  real  alignment  came 
on  the  currency  question.  To  Benton  this  was  the  all  im- 
portant question  of  state  policy.  His  political  friends  in  the 
state  government  took  up  his  side  of  the  question  and  fought 
it  to  a  successful  conclusion,  so  far  as  law  was  concerned,  and 
Benton,  no  doubt,  considered  himself  under  obligation  to 
them  for  doing  so.  On  other  questions  in  which  he  was  not 
personally  concerned  Benton  incurred  bitter  opposition  for 
the  sake  of  his  political  friends  who  had  aided  in  securing 
his  favorite  currency  laws. 

These  questions  were  the  limitation  of  the  term  of  judges, 
the  reapportionment  of  representation  in  the  lower  house  of 
the  General  Assembly,  and  the  adoption  of  the  district 
system  in  the  election  of  congressmen.  The  first  two  ques- 
tions caused  a  demand  for  a  constitutional  convention.  The 
life  term  of  the  judiciary  was  contrary  to  the  ideas  of  Jack- 
sonian  Democracy  which  demanded  that  the  offices  be  passed 
around.  The  constitution  created  a  Supreme  Court  and  gave 
the  General  Assembly  power  to  create  circuit  courts,  as 
well  as  inferior  courts.     The  constitution  also  provided  that 


158  MISSOURI  HISTORICAL  REVIEW. 

all  judges  should  be  appointed  by  the  governor  and  should 
hold  office  for  life.  The  dissatisfaction  was  chiefly  with  the 
life  term  provision.  As  the  judges  were  all  Democrats  the 
Whigs  were  naturally  willing  to  see  the  life  term  abolished. 
This  argument  for  a  constitutional  convention  appealed  with 
much  force  to  many  people.  The  Democrats  tried,  too  late, 
to  amend  the  constitution  and  thus  remove  the  question  of 
judicial  term  as  a  cause  for  calling  a  constitutional  conven- 
tion. The  legislature  passed  an  amendment  in  1842  reducing 
the  term  of  the  supreme  court  judges  to  ten  years  and  all 
others  to  six  years.  The  amendment  contained  a  clause 
vacating  the  offices  of  all  judges  on  the  first  day  of  January 
1845.^^  Before  the  amendment  could  become  a  part  of  the 
constitution  it  had  to  be  passed  again  by  the  legislature  of 
1844.  As  its  passage  would  have  given  the  governor  the 
opportunity  of  immediately  filling  all  judicial  offices  of  the 
State,  and  thus  would  have  given  him  a  chance  to  reward  his 
political  friends,  the  Hards,  the  Whigs  voted  solidly  against 
the  amendment  when  it  came  up  for  second  passage,  and  it 
failed  to  receive  the  necessary  two  thirds  vote.^* 

A  large  and  growing  body  of  voters  were  demanding  a 
constitutional  convention  for  the  purpose  of  securing  a  read- 
justment of  representation  in  the  General  Assembly.  The 
constitution  of  the  State  contained  the  following  clause: 
"Each  county  shall  have  at  least  one  representative  but  the 
whole  number  of  representatives  shall  never  exceed  one  hun- 
dred".^" The  result  of  this  clause  was  a  growing  inequality 
in  representation.  In  1820  the  fifteen  counties  were  repre- 
sented by  forty-three  members  in  the  House  of  Representa- 
tives: in  sixteen  years  (1836)  the  number  of  counties  had 
increased  to  sixty  and  the  number  of  representatives  to 
ninety-eight.  The  legislature  of  1840-41  increased  the 
number  of  counties  to  seventy-seven  and  the  number  of  repre- 
sentatives to  one  hundred,  the  constitutional  limit.  The 
Legislature  of  1842-43  created  nineteen  new  counties  and  as 
each  county  had  to  have  one  representative,  the  next  legis- 

"Laws  of  Missouri.  1843,  p.  9. 

>»Afo.    House   Journal,    1844-45,    pp.    296-297;    Senate   Journal,    1844-45, 
pp.  99f.,  108. 


EARLY  OPPOSITION  TO  THOMAS  HART  BENTON.  159 

lature  in  making  the  apportionment  was  compelled  to  reduce 
all  counties  to  one  representative  except  Platte,  which  was 
given  two,  and  St.  Louis,  which  was  given  four.  The  in- 
equality of  representation  was  now  so  great  that  Caldwell 
county  with  a  total  population  of  1583  had  one  representative 
while  Boone  county  with  a  total  population  of  14,290  had 
only  one  representative,  and  St.  Louis  county  with  a  popula- 
tion of  47,668  had  only  four,  or  approximately  one  repre- 
sentative for  each  12,000  persons.  This  inequality  tended  to 
become  greater  as  the  population  of  St.  Louis  increased  much 
faster  than  that  of  the  frontier  counties.^^  The  older  and  more 
populous  counties  were  usually  Whig.  The  new  counties 
were  Democratic.  The  Whigs  of  the  older  counties  soon 
saw  what  must  happen  to  them  as  the  number  of  counties 
were  increased.  Therefore,  as  early  as  1832  the  Whig  mem- 
bers began  to  fight  the  creation  of  new  counties.^^  But  the 
Democratic  majorities  in  the  Legislature  together  with  the 
fact  that  the  new  counties  were  sure  to  be  Democratic  made 
their  fight  a  hopeless  one  from  the  beginning. 

Upon  this  question  of  reapportionment  the  interests  of 
the  older  and  more  populous  communities  caused  them  to  be 
very  decidedly  in  favor  of  a  constitutional  convention.  The 
frontier  counties,  however,  were  afraid  a  readjustment  of 
representation  might  cause  them  to  be  grouped  into  legis- 
lative districts,  and  they  did  not  care  to  lose  their  individual 
representation.  Benton's  political  success  was  naturally 
favored  by  a  large  Democratic  majority  in  the  legislature, 
but  there  is  no  evidence  that  he  objected  to  a  constitutional 
convention  on  the  question  of  reapportionment. 

The  constitutional  questions  had  been  of  sufficient  impor- 
tance to  cause  the  proposition  of  a  constitutional  convention 
to  be  submitted  to  the  people  in  1835.  The  act  providing 
for  this  convention  made  the  county  the  basis  of  representa- 
tion in  the  convention.  It  was  so  evident  that  the  Democratic 
frontier  counties  would  be  in  control  that  the  Whigs  and  more 

"Constitution  of  IfZO,  Art.  Ill,  Sec.  2. 

"The  Census  Report  of  1850,  p.  655,  gives  the  popxilation  of  St.  Louis 
county  104,978  and  Caldwell  county  2,176. 
"Jefferson  Inquirer,  Oct.  26,  1843. 


160  MISSOURI  HISTORICAL  REVIEW. 

populous  counties  defeated  the  proposition  by  a  vote  of  two 
to  one.^  The  question  of  a  convention  continued  to  be  agi- 
tated until  the  Legislature  of  1842-43  again  submitted  the 
proposition  to  be  voted  on  at  the  August  election  of  1844. 
This  act  made  the  senatorial  district  the  bcisis  of  representa- 
tion in  the  convention.  Many  Democratic  leaders  who  at 
heart  were  probably  opposed  to  the  convention  soon  saw 
that  it  would  be  impossible  to  defeat  it  and,  therefore,  came 
out  for  it.  The  friends  of  Benton  were  the  last  to  come  over 
and  there  is  no  evidence  that  Benton  ever  favored  the  con- 
vention. The  vote  stood  37,426  for,  and  13,750  against  the 
convention.^  The  convention  met  in  the  fall  of  1845.  A 
new  constitution  was  drafted  and  submitted  to  the  people 
at  the  general  election  in  1846.  It  corrected  the  problem  of 
representation  by  creating  legislative  districts  of  the  thinly 
populated  counties,  but  the  constitution  was  rejected  by  a 
majority  of  about  10,000.  The  question  of  districting  the  State 
for  the  purpose  of  electing  members  to  Congress  came  to  be, 
in  its  effect  upon  Benton's  career,  of  equal  if  not  greater  im- 
portance than  that  of  a  constitutional  convention.  The 
Whig  Congress  had  passed  an  act,  1842,  regulating  the  elec- 
tion of  congressmen.  This  act  provided  that  in  each  state 
the  legislature  should  divide  the  state  into  districts  for  the 
purpose  of  electing  congressmen.  Missouri  had  been  electing 
by  general  ticket.  The  greater  part  of  the  State  officers 
and  congressmen  had  been  residents  of  the  central  part  of 
the  State.  This  was  the  oldest  and  most  thickly  settled 
portion  of  the  state  (except  St.  Louis  which  was  a  Whig  city 
in  a  Democratic  state  and  did  not  get  many  of  the  state 
officials)  and  it  would  naturally  be  expected  to  furnish  a 
large  prof)ortion  of  the  officials.  In  the  central  counties  the 
sentiment  of  the  Democrats  was  very  strong  against  the 
district  system,"  but  in  all  the  frontier  sections  every  one 
emphatically  favored  districting  the  state.  There  had  long 
been  a  feeling  in  the  border  counties  that  the  central  part 
of  the  state  was  controlling  everything  and  getting  all  the 

"Missouri  Intelligencer,  Sept.   12,   1835. 
"Statesman,  Nov.  29.  1844. 
**Jefferson  Inquirer,  Aug.  25,  1842. 


EARLY  OPPOSITION  TO  THOMAS  HART  BENTON.  161 

offices.  There  was  good  reason  for  the  feeling.  The  Demo- 
cratic leaders  of  Howard,  Saline,  Cooper,  and  Cole  counties 
had  already  been  designated  as  the  "Central  Clique"  and  the 
district  question  brought  the  two  sections  in  the  Democratic 
party  into  open  conflict. 

These  issues  of  a  new  constitution  and  of  districting  the 
State  are  of  interest  in  this  study  because  Benton  was  prac- 
tically compelled  to  take  the  unpopular  side  of  both  questions. 
His  sentiment  against  paper  currency  and  state  banks  of 
issue  was  so  strong  that  upon  that  question  alone,  so  far  as 
his  speeches  or  letters  show,  he  was  opposed  to  calling  a  con- 
stitutional convention.  No  doubt  his  political  theories  as 
well  as  his  sense  of  fairness  would  have  caused  him  to  favor 
a  convention  upon  both  the  question  of  reapportionment  and 
judicial  tenure,  but  he  was  afraid  a  convention  would  do  away 
with  the  constitutional  restrictions  on  banking.  In  a  letter 
to  the  Democratic  Committee  of  Clay  county,  dated  August 
16,  1843,  he  said:  "The  constitution  of  the  state  of  Missouri 
places  some  restrictions  on  the  legislative  power  over  the 
creation  of  banks;  they  are  not  sufficient,  but  few  as  they  are, 
the  Paper  Money  Party  are  looking  to  the  contingency  of  a 
state  convention  to  sweep  them  all  away  and  lay  the  state 
open  to  the  mad  career  of  free  and  universal  banking."  ^ 
This  statement  indicates  that  he  was  opposed  to  a  constitu- 
tional convention  and  gives  his  reasons,  but  there  is  no  evi- 
dence that  he  actively  aided  the  opposition  to  a  convention. 
The  question  of  districting  the  State  for  the  purpose  of  elect- 
ing members  to  Congress  was  of  greater  importance  to  the 
crowd  of  politicians  who  posed  as  Benton's  friends,  than  the 
question  of  a  constitutional  convention.  There  is  no  evidence 
that,  either  from  a  standpoint  of  principle  or  direct  personal 
interest,  Benton  opposed  districting  the  State.  In  fact,  the 
evidence  points  the  other  way.  Districting  as  a  political 
method  was  more  democratic  than  the  general  ticket  plan  of 
electing  congressmen.  Benton  was  a  typical  western  Democrat 
and  from  principle  should  have  favored  the  district  plan. 
His  enemies  claimed  that  he  had  favored  that  principle  and 

"Jefferson  Inquirer,  Dec.  7,  1844. 


162  MISSOURI  HISTORICAL  REVIEW. 

had  changed  front.  For  proof  they  quoted  Benton's  report 
of  1826  in  favor  of  choice  of  Presidential  electors  by  dis- 
tricts.'^'' Why,  then,  did  Benton  oppose  the  district  system? 
The  only  reasonable  explanation  is  that  he  opposed  it  not 
because  of  the  principle  involved  or  because  of  his  direct 
personal  interests  (for  he  could  have  had  none)  but  because 
of  the  personal  interests  of  his  political  associates  in  Missouri. 
Prominent  among  these  political  friends  were  Minor,  Edwards, 
and  Price  of  Cole  county;  C.  F.  Jackson,  Dr.  Scott,  Dr. 
Lowery,  Redman,  and  Rawlins  of  Howard  county;  Mar- 
maduke  and  Dr.  Penn  of  Saline  county;  and  Sterling  Price 
of  Chariton  county.  All  these  men  lived  in  the  central  part 
of  the  state  and  if  the  state  were  districted  would  likely  be 
thrown  into  one  district  and  only  one  of  them  would  have 
opportunity  to  go  to  Congress.  They  therefor  opposed  the 
district  system  because  of  their  personal  interests.  Benton 
was  not  concerned  personally  except  so  far  as  his  interests 
were  bound  up  with  those  of  his  political  associates,  and  as 
will  be  shown  later  did  not  come  out  on  the  district  question 
until  he  was  compelled  to  do  so. 

ORGANIZATION   OF  FORCES — HARDS   AND   SOFTS. 

After  this  analysis  of  political  conditions  and  issues  it  is 
possible  to  discuss  the  origin  and  development  of  the  so- 
called  "Soft"  faction  in  the  Democratic  party;  a  faction  at 
first  opposing  the  rigorous  restrictions  on  banking  and  small 
notes,  later  advocating  constitutional  changes,  but  soon 
developing  into  the  open  personal  attack  on  Benton  which 
is  the  subject  of  this  study.  After  the  action  of  the  Bank  of 
Missouri  of  November  12,  1839,  refusing  to  receive  or  pay 
out  the  currency  of  suspended  banks,  the  excitement  ran 
high  for  several  days  and  uncertainty  prevailed  everywhere. 
The  Whig  press  was  especially  active  in  the  agitation.  The 
Democratic  organ.  The  Argus,  sustained  the  Bank  in  its 
action.  The  Bank  was  a  partisan  institution.  Its  president 
and  the  directors  appointed  by  the  State,  who  were  in  the 
majority,  were  all  Democrats,  elected  by  a  Democratic  legis- 

'^Thirty  Years'  View,  Vol.  I,  pp.  78-80. 


EARLY  OPPOSITION  TO  THOMAS  HART  BENTON.  163 

lature,  and  naturally  felt  in  some  degree  responsible  to  the 
body  which  elected  them.  One  of  these  directors,  A.  R. 
Corbin,  was  proprietor  of  The  Argus.  A  few  days  after  the 
Bank  passed  its  currency  resolution,  Corbin  sold  The  Argus 
to  A.  J.  Davis.  The  Argus  continued  its  policy  of  defense 
of  the  Bank's  action.  Thus  the  action  of  the  Bank  and  the 
problems  growing  out  of  it  were  considered  by  all  to  be 
political  questions.  The  excitement,  uncertainty,  and  busi- 
ness depression  was  used  by  the  Whigs  as  political  capital. 

The  city  election  in  the  spring  of  1840  gave  the  first 
opportunity  for  the  Whigs  to  turn  the  popular  indignation 
against  the  Bank  to  political  advantage.  For  two  months 
preceding  the  election  The  Republican  (Whig)  attacked  the 
Democratic  party  almost  daily  on  some  phase  of  the  currency 
question.  The  Redman  bill  was  declared  to  be  the  issue  of 
the  contest  in  the  city  election.^*  One  editorial  said,  "Re- 
member that  Col.  Benton  is  determined  to  pass  his  currency 
bill  at  the  next  session  of  the  legislature"  and  then  proceeded 
to  advocate  the  election  of  a  City  Attorney  who  would  not 
enforce  its  provisions.  The  Democrats  conducted  an  active 
campaign  in  defense  of  the  Bank  and  against  depreciated 
currency.  John  Smith,  President  of  the  Bank,  took  a 
prominent  part.  It  was  during  this  campaign  before  the 
city  election  of  1840,  that  the  first  defection  from  the  Demo- 
cratic ranks  was  noticeable.  Mr.  B.  Lawhead,  a  well  known 
Democrat,  addressed  a  Whig  meeting.  Discussing  his  defec- 
tion The  Republican  said,  "But  a  short  time  since  he  was  the 
main  pillar  of  the  administration.  He  was  the  owner  and 
chief  support  of  The  Argus,  and  has  probably  rendered  the 
administration  more  service  than  any  other  individual 
citizen.  He  has  come  boldly  out  against  the  measures  of 
his  party."  ^9 

By  May  1840  enough  Democrats  were  dissatisfied  with 
the  currency  policy  of  the  party  to  form  a  faction  and  hold 
public  meetings.  At  one  of  the  meetings  of  the  "Softs," 
the  "Hards"  turned  out  in  force.  Lawhead  and  Wm.  P. 
Darnes  spoke  for  the  Softs,  and  Riley  and  Trotter  for  the 

"St.  Louis  Republican,  March  13,  1840. 
"St.  Louis  Republican,  Mar.  25,  1840. 


164  MISSOURI  HISTORICAL  REVIEW. 

Hards.  Thos.  B.  Hudson,  who  had  been  the  Democratic 
candidate  for  City  Attorney,  refused  to  respond.  The  Argus 
refused  to  pubHsh  the  proceedings  of  the  meeting,  but  made 
a  personal  attack  on  Darnes.'"  Darnes  met  Davis,  the  pro- 
prietor of  The  Argus,  on  the  street  and  killed  him.  For  the 
deed  he  was  fined  $500.  Soon  after  Davis'  death,  A.  B. 
Corbin  became  proprietor  of  The  Argus  for  the  second  time. 
In  the  summer  of  1840  when  Benton  returned  from  Wash- 
ington he  seems  to  have  taken  some  part  in  the  discussion 
of  local  political  affairs.  The  Republican  said,  "The  Colonel 
finds,  'city  expenditure,  additional  courthouses,  spurious 
banking,  small  notes'  and  last  but  not  least  'recreant  Demo- 
crats.' The  burden  of  his  song  relates  to  city  expenditures 
and  unconstitutional,  spurious  banking  which  is  carried  on 
within  the  city."  ^^  The  above  expressions  appear  to  have 
been  taken  from  a  speech  which  Benton  made  just  before  his 
departure,  according  to  the  Republican,  "for  the  upper 
country  for  the  purpose  of  winding  up  the  legislature  for 
another  year,  should  it  not  be  incompatible  with  his  other 
engagements."  '^  Benton  arrived  at  Jefferson  City  in  the 
early  part  of  October  and  on  the  8th  addressed  a  large  dele- 
gate convention,  the  great  rally  of  the  presidential  campaign. 
This  speech  was  chiefly  upon  the  currency  question  and  was 
one  of  Benton's  greatest  speeches  upon  that  subject.  Three 
years  later  when  the  conflict  between  the  Softs  and  Hards 
had  become  well  developed  this  speech  was  published  by  the 
Jefferson  Inquirer  for  campaign  purposes.^'  Benton  said: 
"The  currency  question  is  the  great  question  of  the  age." 
He  stated  that  those  who  had  struck  down  the  second  Bank 
of  the  United  States  had  put  in  its  place  the  constitutional 
currency,  gold  and  silver;  that  in  order  to  accomplish  this  a 
number  of  acts  had  been  passed,  namely:  The  repeal  of  the 
act  of  1819  against  the  circulation  of  foreign  silver,  the  act 
correcting  the  ratio  between  silver  and  gold,  the  act  creating 
branch  United  States  mints,  the  act  which  excludes  small 

•"Edwards,  Great  West,  pp.  370f. 

*>St.  Louis  Republican,  Sept.  30,  1840. 

"Ibid. 

**Jefferson  Inquirer,  Aug.  31,  1843. 


EARLY  OPPOSITION  TO  THOMAS  HART  BENTON.  165 

notes — all  under  $20  from  the  receipts  and  disbursements 
of  the  government,  and  the  act  creating  a  United  States 
treasury.  But  yet  other  measures  were  necessary  to  complete 
the  great  object.  One  was  to  suppress  all  paper  money  under 
$20.  This  had  been  attempted  but  had  not  yet  been  ac- 
complished. He  continued:  "Let  every  state  suppress  within 
its  own  limits  the  circulation  of  all  paper  under  twenty  dol- 
lars.'^ I  repeat  it  the  currency  question  is  the  great  question 
of  the  age,  it  absorbs  and  swallows  up  every  other ;  the  Democ- 
racy must  purify  and  protect  it;  they  must  save  labor, 
industry,  and  commerce  from  the  depredations  of  depreciated 
paper;  they  must  stop  the  banks  from  suspending  when  they 
please  and  resuming  when  they  please;  they  must  reduce 
corporations  as  well  as  individuals  to  the  subordination  of 
the  law;  they  must  maintain  the  specie  circulation;  they 
must  do  all  these  things  or  surrender  the  government  both 
state  and  federal.  They  will  lose  all  power  if  they  do  not 
and  what  is  more  they  will  deserve  to  lose  it."  This  speech 
coming  as  it  did  just  before  the  meeting  of  the  General 
Assembly,  which  convened  the  third  Monday  in  November, 
became  the  keynote  to  the  policy  of  the  legislature.  Col. 
Benton  remained  in  Jefferson  City  and  vicinity  until  he  had 
to  start  for  Washington  if  he  were  to  get  there  for  the  opening 
of  Congress.  His  political  opponents  claimed  that  he  was 
using  undue  influence  with  the  legislature,  outlining  its  work, 
and  directing  its  leaders.'^ 

The  legislative  program  upon  the  currency  and  related 
problems  was  quite  ambitious.  The  course  of  the  Bank  in 
repudiating  the  notes  of  suspended  banks  was  approved  by 
resolution,  and  legislative  sanction  was  also  indicated  by  re- 
electing John  Smith  president  of  the  Bank.^^  A  resolution 
providing  for  a  committee  to  investigate  the  business  of  the 
insurance  companies  was  passed.  A  law  was  enacted  taxing 
brokers  and  exchange  dealers  on  all  bills,  notes,  money  or 
property  handled  or  held  in  trust  for  citizens  of  other  states.^^ 

»*Benton  said  that  individually  he  preferred  to  make  one  hundred  dollars 
the  limit  instead  of  twenty. 

"St.  Louis  Republican,  Nov.  18,  1840. 
"House  Journal,  1840,  pp.  116-118. 
"Jefferson  Inquirer,  Dec.  24,  1840. 


166  MISSOURI  HISTORICAL  REVIEW. 

The  Redman  currency  bill  was  passed  in  the  House  and 
lacked  only  one  vote  of  passing  the  Senate.  But  probably 
the  most  important  of  all  these  measures  in  its  immediate 
effect  was  the  act  amending  the  act  of  incorporation  for  St. 
Louis.'^  This  act  was  introduced  by  Redman,  of  Howard 
county,  and  pushed  thru  over  the  protest  of  the  delegation 
from  St.  Louis.  This  act  changed  the  ward  boundary  lines 
of  the  city  to  favor  the  Democrats  and  removed  all  property 
qualifications  for  suffrage  in  city  elections.  The  corre- 
spondent of  the  St.  Louis  Republican  was  expelled  from  the 
privilege  of  going  within  the  bar  of  the  House  because  he  had 
condemned  the  act  in  strong  language.^^  The  other  city 
papers  allowed  the  Republican  to  use  their  correspondence 
and  all  the  papers  of  the  city,  Democratic  as  well  as  Whig, 
condemned  the  action  of  the  legislature.*"  Thus  the  an- 
tagonism between  St.  Louis  and  the  State  government  was 
intensified  and  public  opinion  tended  to  become  unified  con- 
cerning all  subjects  upon  which  there  was  a  difference  of 
opinion  between  the  city  interests  and  the  central  govern- 
ment. The  changes  in  ward  boundaries  and  the  enlarged 
city  electorate  gave  the  Democrats  a  chance  in  the  city 
election  of  1841.  Corbin,  Democrat  and  editor  of  The  Argus, 
was  elected  to  the  city  council.  The  Republican,  Whig, 
commenting  on  Corbin's  election,  said,  "Other  circumstances 
than  mere  party  strength  elected  him  and  we  hope  that 
other  than  mere  party  considerations  will  govern  his  action."  " 
The  Jefferson  City  Inquirer  quoted  the  above  comment  and 
said,  "Other  circumstances  had  reference  to  the  currency 
problems."  *^ 

In  December,  1840,  The  Argus  began  to  change  front  on 
the  currency  question  and  was  attacked  for  its  desertion  of 
Democracy  by  The  Inquirer  and  the  Boonslick  Democrat.^ 
In  the  editorial  discussion  which  followed  it  was  made  clear 
that  the  St.   Louis  paper  was  shifting  its  position  on  the 

**Laws  of  Missouri,  1840-41,  pp.  129-141. 
•»S«.  Louis  Republican,  Jan.  11,  1841. 
"Ibid.,  Jan.  12,  1841. 
«'St.  Louis  Republican,  Apr.  7,  1841. 
"Jefferson  Inquirer,  Apr.  15,  1841. 
"Jefferson  Inquirer,  Dec.  17,  1840. 


EARLY  OPPOSITION  TO  THOMAS  HART  BENTON.  167 

currency  and  banking  problem  in  general.  The  Argus  was 
not  alone  among  St.  Louis  Democrats  in  this  movement. 
Early  in  1841  the  directors  of  the  Bank  of  Missouri  rescinded 
the  order  of  November  12,  1839,  and  from  that  time  on  the 
Bank  dealt  in  the  paper  currency  of  other  banks.*^  The 
attitude  of  many  Democrats  in  St.  Louis  was  probably  like 
that  of  General  Miller,  the  Democratic  postmaster,  evidently 
not  a  man  unfriendly  to  Benton  else  he  could  not  have  held 
that  position.  When  he  was  removed  by  the  Tyler  admin- 
istration in  1841,  The  Inquirer  commented  thus,  "We  are 
not  afraid  to  say  that  a  respectable  number  of  Democrats 
(not  oil  and  water  men)  were  ready  to  sanction  the  removal 
of  General  Miller,  not  that  he  was  either  a  drunkard  or  a 
gambler,  but  that  among  other  reasons  he  was  suspected  of 
being  neither  a  Whig  nor  a  Democrat."  *^  As  early  as  April, 
1841,  The  Inquirer  had  suggested  the  need  of  another  Demo- 
cratic paper  in  St.  Louis,  in  the  following  language:  "Our 
candid  and  deliberate  opinion  is  that  the  Democracy  of  St. 
Louis  and  the  whole  state,  owe  it  to  themselves,  to  establish 
another  press  in  the  city."  *'  This  suggestion  was  approved 
by  most  of  the  Democratic  press  of  the  state.  On  August 
26,  1841,  The  Inquirer  said,  "Altho  The  Argus  hangs  on  the 
name  of  Col.  Benton,  our  friends  will  ere  long  find,  what  we 
last  winter  proclaimed,  that  he  is  an  enemy  in  disguise." 
On  the  other  hand  The  Argus  attacked  Governor  Reynolds, 
Dr.  Lowery,  The  Inquirer,  the  Boonslick  Democrat,  and  others 
of  the  "Central  Clique."  In  the  fall  of  1841  Corbin  sold 
The  Argus  to  Shadrick  Penn,  Jr.,  who  changed  its  name  to 
the  Missouri  Reporter.  Penn  was  an  editor  of  long  experience 
who  had  moved  from  Louisville,  Kentucky.  The  Reporter 
was  welcomed  by  the  Democratic  press  of  the  state,  and  for  a 
time  appeared  to  try  to  cultivate  friendly  relations  with  the 
up-State  Democracy  and  carefully  avoided  any  reference  to 
the  Central  Clique.  Penn  even  went  so  far  as  to  publicly 
repudiate  Corbin  who  was  a  candidate  for  Congress.*^    The 

"St.  Louis  Republican,  Mar.  13,  1841. 

"Jefferson  Inquirer,  Jan.  24,  1841. 

"Ibid.,  Apr.  8,  1841. 

"Jefferson  Inquirer,  Jan.  20,  1842. 

2 


168  MISSOURI  HISTORICAL  REVIEW. 

currency  question  seemed  to  drop  out  of  politics  so  far  as 
St.  Louis  was  concerned.  Nativism  sprang  up  there.  The 
Whig  party  became  hopelessly  divided.  The  Democrats 
carried  the  city  in  April  1842,  and  in  August  they  elected  one 
senator  and  five  out  of  seven  representatives  to  the  State 
legislature.  Such  a  victory  could  be  won  only  by  selecting 
men  who  could  be  trusted  to  reflect  the  popular  sentiment 
toward  the  most  vital  public  question  of  the  day — that  of 
banking.  In  St.  Louis  that  was  the  side  of  liberal  construc- 
tion of  the  banking  and  corporation  laws.  Evidence  that 
these  men  were  liberal  in  their  views  on  banking  and  cor- 
porations is  found  in  the  fact  that  both  the  men  and  the 
issues  upon  which  they  were  elected  were  displeasing  to  Col. 
Benton.** 

A  Democratic  delegation  with  liberal  views  on  the  cur- 
rency could  be  of  greater  service  to  St.  Louis  in  a  Democratic 
legislature  than  could  a  Whig  delegation.  The  opportunity 
for  this  service  came  on  the  election  of  the  president  and 
directors  of  the  Bank.  As  noted  above,  soon  after  the  legis- 
lature adjourned  in  1841,  the  Bank  by  vote  of  its  directors 
decided  to  receive  deposits  of  depreciated  currency.  The 
Hard  money  Democrats  of  the  State  were  opposed  to  that 
policy  of  the  Bank  and  decided  to  elect  to  the  presidency 
Dr.  Penn,  of  Howard  county,  a  Hard  money  Democrat  whom 
they  were  sure  they  could  trust.  The  St.  Louis  Democrats 
were  much  averse  to  a  Hard  money  man  from  the  country 
and  determined  to  elect  Kenneth,  one  of  the  directors  who 
had  voted  to  receive  the  depreciated  currency.  C.  F.  Jackson, 
of  Howard  county,  led  the  fight  for  the  Hards  and  Thos.  B. 
Hudson  led  the  St.  Louis  delegation.  Hudson  forced  the 
issue  and  Jackson  played  for  delay.  The  test  vote  came  on 
a  resolution  of  Jackson's  which  provided  for  an  investigating 
committee  and  put  off  the  election  until  the  committee  would 
have  time  to  report.  This  resolution  was  defeated  by  a  vote 
of  42  ayes  to  86  nays.*' 

This  was  the  first  definite  conflict  between  the  Hards 
led  by  a  group  of  men  dubbed  by  their  opponents  the  "Cen- 

"Penn's  Letters,  Missouri  Register,  Nov.  14,  1843. 
"House  Journal,  1840.  pp.  100-102. 


EARLY  OPPOSITION  TO  THOMAS  HART  BENTON.  169 

tral  Clique"  and  the  Softs  led  by  Hudson  of  St.  Louis,  English 
of  Cape  Girardeau,  Ex-Governor  Boggs  of  Jackson  county, 
Ellis  of  Clinton  county,  and  Wells  of  Lincoln  county.  Con- 
spicuous among  the  leaders  of  the  Central  Clique  were  C.  F. 
Jackson,  J.  J.  Lowery,  Dr.  Scott,  Redman,  and  Governor 
Reynolds,  all  of  Howard  county;  and  in  addition  to  these, 
sometimes  called  the  Fayette  Clique,  Dr.  Penn,  Marmaduke, 
and  Sterling  Price  should  be  mentioned.  The  Jefferson 
Inquirer  became  the  champion  of  the  Hards,  and  the  Missouri 
Reporter  of  St.  Louis  was  the  leading  newspaper  of  the  Softs. 

Until  the  fight  over  the  election  of  the  president  of  the 
Bank,  the  Inquirer  and  The  Reporter  had  maintained  friendly 
relations,  but  the  Reporter  now  came  out  openly  and  con- 
demned the  Central  Clique  in  even  stronger  terms  than  The 
Argus  had  used.  The  Inquirer  replied  editorially:  "War 
has  been  declared  by  the  press  of  St.  Louis  both  Whig  and 
Democratic,  and  it  is  a  war  in  favor  of  small  notes,  against 
hard  money;  in  favor  of  shinplasters  and  swindling  shops, 
against  half  eagles  and  Benton  mint  drops ;  and  every  member 
of  the  legislature  who  does  not  bow  in  submission  to  the  coali- 
tion will  be  marked  for  proscription  at  the  next  election. 
Their  hate  extends  from  Benton  to  every  member  who  does 
not  obey  implicitly  the  commands  of  their  St.  Louis  masters. 
We  say  to  the  Democracy  of  the  state  every  man  to  his  post."^** 
The  fight  was  now  on  in  dead  earnest.  The  Reporter  struck  a 
popular  chord  in  advocating  districting  and  a  constitutional 
convention.  The  blows  of  Penn  began  to  tell.  Something 
had  to  be  done  or  the  Hards  would  be  overthrown.  Col. 
Switzler,  editor  of  the  Statesman  (Whig),  in  commenting  upon 
a  Democratic  mass  meeting  in  Clinton  county  which  had  pro- 
posed David  R.  Atchison  for  governor  said:  "This  will  prove 
serious  and  annoying  to  the  Central  Clique,"  and  referring 
to  Penn,  "He  will  either  whip  them  into  open  advocacy  of 
his  doctrine  or  he  will  guillotine  every  mother's  son  of  them 
from  his  excellency  down."  " 

After  the  Bank  election  the  factional  contest  opened  up 
as  a  newspaper  fight.     The  Democratic  press  of    the  state 

**Jefferson  Inquirer,  Jan.  5,  1843. 
*>Statesman,  Apr.  21,  1843. 


170  MISSOURI  HISTORICAL  REVIEW. 

began  to  take  sides  either  with  the  Reporter  or  the  Inquirer. 
New  papers  were  started  at  strategic  points  by  both  factions 
and  efforts  were  made  by  each  to  overthrow  the  presses  of 
the  other.  Penn  by  pushing  the  constitutional  questions 
and  districting  to  the  front  secured  the  support  of  several 
papers  in  the  border  of  the  State.  The  Soft  press  of  the 
state  included,  in  addition  to  the  Reporter,  the  Ozark  Eagle, 
at  Springfield,  the  Liberty  Banner,  in  Clay  county,  the  Grand 
River  Chronicle,  at  Chillicothe,  the  Osage  Yeoman,  at  Warsaw, 
and  the  Missouri  Register,  at  Boonville.  The  unquestioned 
Hard  papers  were  the  Jefferson  Inquirer,  the  Boonslick  Demo- 
crat, in  Howard  county,  the  Fayette  Democrat,  in  Howard 
county,  the  Paris  Sentinel,  the  Western  Missourian,  in  Jack- 
son county,  the  Boonville  Argus,  and  the  Missouri  Standard 
(later  the  Missourian),  in  St.  Louis.  The  Liberty  Banner 
and  the  Osage  Yeoman  (Soft)  and  the  Missouri  Standard  and 
the  Boonville  Argus  (Hard)  were  established  during  the  year 
1843. 

Such  was  the  political  condition  in  Missouri  when  Col. 
Benton  arrived  from  Washington  in  the  summer  of  1843, 
and  threw  the  great  weight  of  his  influence  into  the  contest 
on  the  side  of  the  Hards.  During  the  summer  Benton  made 
his  usual  trip  to  the  central  part  of  the  state.  After  his  visit 
to  Warsaw  the  Osage  Yeoman  (Soft)  announced  in  an  editorial 
that  Benton  was  in  favor  of  the  districting  system.  Benton, 
as  soon  as  he  saw  the  editorial,  made  the  following  announce- 
ment over  his  signature  dated  August  23,  1843,  which  was 
published  and  copied  in  practically  all  the  papers  of  the 
state:  "Justice  to  my  political  friends  (against  whom  my 
imputed  opinions  are  quoted)  requires  me  to  notice  a  state- 
ment in  the  Osage  Yeoman  in  which  opinions  are  attributed 
to  me  which  I  never  expressed,  as  that  I  was  in  favor  of  the 
district  system — that  Col.  Johnson  would  take  the  western 
states,  etc.  The  editor  of  the  Yeoman  has  been  misinformed 
and  I  deem  it  my  duty  to  say  so  as  an  act  of  justice  to  my 
political  friends,  seeing  the  use  which  is  made  of  this  erroneous 
statement  against  them."  ^^  This  is  all  the  part  that  Benton 
took  in  the  contest  on  the  district  question  so  far  as  the  records 

"Statesman.  Sept.  1,  1843. 


EARLY  OPPOSITION  TO  THOMAS  HART  BENTON.  171 

show,  but  from  this  time  on  the  Softs  had  a  great  deal  to  say 
about  his  opposition  to  districting. 

On  Benton's  return  to  St.  Louis  he  wrote  a  number  of 
letters  in  which  he  made  suggestions  concerning  the  factional 
fight  within  the  Democratic  ranks.  These  could  leave  no 
doubt  in  the  minds  of  Penn  and  his  followers  as  to  Benton's 
attitude  toward  them.  For  instance  in  his  Palmyra  letter  of 
September  16,  declining  an  invitation  to  visit  the  city,  he 
said:  "Your  allusions  to  insidious  and  disguised  enemies  of 
the  party  are  just  and  true.  I  have  long  seen  their  designs 
such  as  you  describe  them;  and  time  will  soon  verify  all  that 
you  have  said.  But  no  matter.  Underhanded  enemies 
cannot  flourish  in  Missouri.  The  spirit  of  the  country  is 
high,  and  requires  an  open  foe  and  a  manly  contest.  To  make 
war  upon  a  party  while  professing  to  belong  to  it, — to  under- 
mine public  men  while  professing  to  support  them — to  foment 
division  while  preaching  union,  to  kiss  Tylerites  and  Whigs 
while  biting  Democrats,  is  a  specie  of  warfare  of  recent  im- 
portation among  us,  and  which  can  have  but  a  brief  existence 
in  our  generous  clime."  Also  under  date  of  September  16, 
Benton  wrote  his  letter  to  the  Clay  county  committee 
(quoted  above)  in  which  he  took  a  position  against  a  con- 
stitutional convention  because  of  the  danger  of  sweeping 
away  the  restrictions  on  banking. 

A  Hard  Democratic  paper,  the  Missouri  Standard, 
which  had  been  started  in  St.  Louis  in  the  spring  of  1843, 
had  never  attained  sufficient  circulation  to  make  it  effective. 
Benton  and  the  Hard  faction  started  a  new  paper  in  its 
stead,  the  Missourian,  under  the  management  of  Van  Ant- 
werp, an  editor  from  Iowa.  Benton  wrote  a  strong  letter  of 
recommendation  for  Van  Antwerp  and  urged  Democrats  in 
all  parts  of  the  State  to  support  the  new  paper.  This  letter 
was  published  and  widely  copied  by  the  press  both  Whig  and 
Democratic.  The  Missouri  Register  (Soft)  and  the  Statesman 
(Whig)  claimed  that  it  was  scattered  over  the  State  under 
Benton's  frank.^  These  letters,  together  with  Benton's 
statement  in  answer  to  the  Osage   Yeoman  (quoted  above) 

'^Missouri  Register,  Oct.  3,  Dec.  18,  1843;  Statesman,  Sept.  29,  1843. 


172  MISSOURI  HISTORICAL  REVIEW. 

declaring  that  the  Yeoman  was  mistaken  in  quoting  him  as 
having  favored  districting,  put  him  at  the  head  of  the  contest 
against  the  Softs,  put  new  vigor  into  the  Hards,  caused  a 
closer  alignment,  and  brought  Penn  out  in  the  open  against 
Benton. 

CONTEST  FOR  PARTY  CONTROL. 

Benton's  emphatic  support  of  the  Hards  and  the  Central 
Clique  left  the  Softs  no  choice  except  submission  or  open 
opposition  to  Benton.  The  Softs  at  heart  had  probably 
been  opposed  to  Benton  for  sometime,  but  had  dreaded  the 
effect  upon  the  public  of  an  open  breach  with  him.  A  few 
of  the  bolder  ones  among  them  had  declared  openly  against 
him,  and  it  was  no  doubt  true  that  some  adhered  to  the  Soft 
faction  not  because  of  their  views  upon  the  currency  but 
because  of  their  feeling  of  hatred  to  Benton  whose  speeches 
and  well  known  views  upon  the  money  question  made  him 
the  logical  leader  of  the  Hards.  The  position  of  The  Ozark 
Eagle,  it  seems,  is  to  be  explained  in  this  way.  A  deep  seated 
antagonism  to  the  Central  Clique  and  to  Benton  in  particular 
appears  to  have  existed  at  Springfield  as  early  as  1840.** 

In  addition  to  Col.  Benton's  strong  and  open  support  of 
the  Hards  there  was  one  other  event,  which  occurred  in 
November,  1843,  which  probably  exercised  a  determining 
influence  upon  the  contest.  Dr.  Linn,  United  States  Senator 
from  Missouri  and  colleague  of  Col.  Benton,  died  and  Governor 
Reynolds  thus  suddenly  found  at  his  disposal  the  ofiice  of 
United  States  Senator.  The  Northwest  was  at  that  time 
one  of  the  most  rapidly  growing  sections  of  the  State  and  a 
strong  anti-Central  Clique  and  Soft  sentiment  existed  there. 
David  R.  Atchison,  of  Clinton  county,  the  most  popular 
man  of  that  section,  from  all  the  evidence  as  will  be  shown 
later,  a  Soft  and  no  doubt  at  heart  an  anti-Benton  man,  was 
appointed  United  States  Senator  to  fill  the  vacancy  caused 
by  the  death  of  Senator  Linn.  In  this  appointment  Gov- 
ernor Reynolds  who  was  accused  by  the  Softs  of  being  the 
head  of  the  Central  Clique  made  it  appear  that  there  was 

**Jefferson  Inquirer,  Jan.  27,  1842. 


EARLY  OPPOSITION  TO  THOMAS  HART  BENTON.  173 

no  such  organization  by  going  to  the  border  of  the  State 
and  selecting  a  leader  of  the  opposing  faction  for  the  highest 
position  within  the  gift  of  the  people  of  Missouri.  More 
important  than  the  general  effect  and  appearance  was  the 
fact  that  in  this  appointment  Governor  Reynolds  spiked 
the  guns  of  Atchinson  and  his  friends  and  if  he  did  not  make 
them  supporters  of  Benton,  he  at  least  put  them  in  a  posi- 
tion where  they  could  not  afford  to  openly  oppose  him. 

On  October  24,  1843,  Penn,  the  editor  of  The  Missouri 
Reporter,  began  the  publication  of  a  series  of  open  daily  letters 
to  Benton.^*  In  these  letters,  eight  in  number  and  each 
four  or  five  columns  in  length,  Penn  came  out  openly  against 
Benton;  reviewed  his  own  and  Benton's  positions  on  public 
questions  in  the  past,  the  St.  Louis  situation,  the  work  of  the 
Central  Clique,  and  the  issues  of  the  contest.  Much  atten- 
tion was  given  to  the  Central  Clique  and  Benton's  connection 
with  it,  and  his  obligation  to  it  was  clearly  shown.  The 
constitutional  questions,  the  districting  question  and  the 
currency  question  were  given  much  space  and  were  well 
handled  from  the  Soft  point  of  view.  The  chief  feature  of 
the  letters,  however,  was  a  direct  personal  attack  upon 
Benton.  He  was  compared  to  Louis  XIV  of  France,  de- 
nounced as  a  political  dictator  and  a  tyrant  of  the  worst 
sort,  and  accused  of  being  responsible  for  the  schemes  and 
slates  of  the  Central  Clique.  On  questions  of  national 
policy,  especially  the  currency,  Benton  was  accused  of  having 
borrowed  all  his  ideas  from  Calhoun. 

In  conclusion  Penn  intimated  that  Benton's  wonted 
decision  of  character  had  deserted  him,  that  should  his  clique 
friends  advise  him  to  back  straight  out  of  State  politics  and 
cease  to  play  the  dictator,  he  would  prove  discreet  and  tame 
enough  to  do  so.  They  would  long  since  have  tendered  such 
advice  to  him  but  for  their  selfish  desire  to  use  his  power  to 
enable  them  to  monopolize  the  offices  of  the  State.  This 
had  been  the  secret  of  their  past  devotion  to  Benton  and  it 
was  the  cause  of  the  fervor  of  their  faith  in  him.  If  they  had 
sung  hozannas  they  were  inspired  by  ambition  and  not  by 
love,  and  as  the  prospect  of  aggrandizing  themselves  by  the 

"Copied  in  the  Missouri  Register,  weekly,  November  and  December,  1843. 


174  MISSOURI  HISTORICAL  REVIEW. 

use  of  Benton's  name  might  diminish,  their  songs  of  praise 
would  gradually  die  away.  Penn  advised  Benton  to  look  to 
those  whom  he  had  regarded  as  faithful  to  the  cause  in  Morgan 
and  Howard  counties  and  closed  his  characterization  of 
Benton's  Clique  friends  as  follows:  "Finally,  when  rode  down 
by  the  charlatans  in  whom  you  confide  they  will  be  the  first  to 
forget  the  good  that  you  have  done,  and  the  most  active  and 
malevolent  in  exposing  and  condemning  your  errors  and  trans- 
gressions. Like  your  special  friend  of  The  Globe  they  regard 
all  minorities  as  anti-democratic,  and  whenever  you  cease  to 
command  a  majority  of  the  state,  their  peculiar  principles 
will  compel  them  to  denounce  you  right  or  wrong,  as  a  re- 
creant and  a  traitor.  Mark  this  prediction.  It  may  be 
verified  sooner  than  you  expect." 

The  publication  of  Penn's  letters  gave  a  renewed  impetus 
to  the  factional  fight  and  turned  the  emphasis  from  the  cur- 
rency and  other  issues  to  the  personality  of  Benton.  The 
two  factions  still  called  each  other  Hards  and  Softs  but  in 
reality  they  became  Benton  and  Anti-Benton  factions. 

There  are  four  principal  lines  of  evidence  which  throw 
some  light  on  the  factional  struggle  during  the  winter  of  1843- 
44. 

First,  the  press  of  the  State,  especially  the  Democratic 
press,  was  full  of  editorials.  These  were  partisan  in  varing 
degrees,  but  usually  quite  bitter.  The  Whig  press,  although 
it  professed  to  stand  aloof,  was  certainly  characterized  by  a 
strong  Anti-Benton  tone.  In  February,  1864,  there  were 
twenty-four  political  papers  published  in  the  State.  Four- 
teen of  these  were  Democratic.*^  Of  these  fourteen,  five 
were  certainly  anti-Benton,  six  were  undoubtedly  Benton 
papers.  Strenuous  efforts  were  made  by  each  side  to  support 
its  own  press  and  if  opportunity  offered  to  overthrow  the  op- 
position papers.  With  the  publication  of  the  Penn  letters 
the  Democratic  press  took  a  more  definite  position.  The 
Benton  papers  had  insisted  for  nearly  a  year  before  Penn's 
letters  were  published  that  the  real  issue  was  "Benton  or  no 
Benton."  " 

''Statesman,  Feb.  2,  1844. 
'^Jefferson  Inquirer,  Sept.  21,  1843. 


EARLY  OPPOSITION  TO  THOMAS  HART  BENTON.  175 

Second,  since  1840  there  had  been  a  gradual  and  fairly 
rapid  growth  of  political  organization.  But  this  was  accom- 
panied by  considerable  opposition,  sometimes  violent,  from 
those  known  as  independents,  who  did  not  believe  in  political 
machinery  and  organization.  This  growth  of  political  ma- 
chinery took  place  in  both  parties  but  was  more  rapid  and 
popular  in  the  Democratic  than  in  the  Whig  party.  Neither 
side  seemed  to  understand  the  real  value  of  the  machinery 
of  the  party  organization  that  had  been  built  up.  In  1840 
there  were  no  permanent  committees.  Campaigns  had  to 
be  started  by  the  newspapers.  Usually  one  paper  suggested 
a  meeting  or  convention.  If  the  suggestion  met  with  the 
approval  of  the  other  editors  in  the  territory  concerned  they 
copied  and  recommended  the  meeting.  The  press  then  got 
behind  the  convention  and  pushed  it,  and  urged  county  or 
township  meetings,  to  organize  and  to  elect  delegates.  This 
condition  probably  accounts  for  the  great  importance  at- 
tached to  the  press  by  all  the  politicians  of  the  period.  Com- 
mittees of  correspondence  were  appointed  after  the  news- 
papers had  started  the  movement,  but  their  duty  ended  with 
the  election  as  did  the  State  Central  Committee,  which  was 
simply  a  committee  appointed  from  a  few  counties  in  the 
central  part  of  the  State,  usually  Howard,  Cooper,  Boone, 
Cole  and  Callaway .^^  In  1841  a  movement  was  begun,  prob- 
ably by  the  Central  Clique,  having  for  its  purpose  the  organi- 
zation of  the  democracy  along  the  lines  of  the  party  organiza- 
tion in  New  York.  This  movement  grew  rapidly  and  by 
the  spring  of  1844  the  Democratic  party  had  a  permanent 
organization  in  nearly  all  the  counties  of  the  state  with 
standing  committees  very  similar  to  those  of  political  parties 
of  today. 

Third,  the  sentiment  of  the  rank  and  file  of  the  democ- 
racy of  the  State  may  be  found  by  examining  the  reports 
of  the  county  meetings  held  in  the  winter  of  1843-44  for  the 
purpose  of  electing  delegates  to  the  State  Convention.  As 
soon  as  "Benton  or  no  Benton"  had  come  to  be  acknowledged 
by  all  as  the  real  issue,  the  Hard  papers  began  to  refer  to  the 
constitutional  convention,  districting,  and  even  the  details 

"Missouri  Register,  Oct.  22,  1840. 


176  MISSOURI  HISTORICAL  REVIEW. 

of  the  currency  bills,  meaning  the  penalties,  as  mere  matters 
upon  which  Democrats  might  honestly  differ.  The  real  question 
at  issue  was  the  election  of  the  United  States  Senator.  Missouri 
must  stand  by  her  distinguished  statesman.  To  be  disloyal 
to  Benton,  according  to  these  papers,  was  to  be  a  traitor  to 
the  party.  This  change  of  emphasis  gave  the  Hards  a  great 
advantage.  There  was  a  real  contest  in  nearly  all  the  coun- 
ties of  the  State,  so  that  the  resolutions  passed  meant  some- 
thing. The  Central  Clique  undoubtedly  had  their  lieutenants 
in  most  of  these  counties  and  probably  half  a  dozen  men 
attempted  to  call  the  meeting,  get  themselves  elected  as 
officers  and  committeemen,  adopt  a  cut  and  dried  set  of  reso- 
lutions, and  have  themselves  sent  as  delegates  to  the  State 
Convention  at  Jefferson  City,  but  the  fight  became  too  hot 
for  that  sort  of  thing  to  work  well.  Both  sides  played  at 
the  same  game  and  then  it  became  a  question  of  getting  out 
the  vote.  Each  man  in  most  instances  had  an  opportunity 
to  vote  for  the  kind  of  resolution  that  he  wanted  on  the 
question  at  issue.  While  one  side  usually  elected  the  chair- 
man and  controlled  the  committee  on  resolutions,  the  other 
side  was  always  ready  with  substitute  resolutions  on  the  im- 
portant questions.  The  real  contest  for  the  control  and  party 
name  was  fought  out  in  these  meetings.  Forty  sets  of  these 
county  resolutions  have  been  examined.  Out  of  the  forty 
only  five  were  radically  Soft,  while  eleven  were  radically 
Hard;  but  seventeen  showed  Soft  tendencies,  while  only 
seven,  not  radically  Hard,  showed  Hard  tendencies.  The 
counties  which  adopted  Soft  resolutions  were  St.  Louis,  Cape 
Girardeau,  Clinton,  Clay  and  Lafayette.  The  Hard  counties 
were  Howard,  Saline,  Pettis,  Cole,  Morgan,  Miller,  Boone,  Cal- 
laway, Randolph,  Macon  and  Washington.  A  glance  at  the 
map  shows  that  there  was  good  reason  for  the  charges  of  the 
existence  of  a  Central  Clique.  All  the  radically  Hard  coun- 
ties except  Washington  were  compactly  grouped  in  the 
center,  and  in  this  central  territory  all  the  counties  were  Hard 
except  Cooper  where  The  Missouri  Register  was  published. 
There  were  three  Soft  strongholds.  One  was  in  St.  Louis 
where  the  movement  had  begun.     Another  was  in  the  South- 


EARLY  OPPOSITION  TO  THOMAS  HART  BENTON.  177 

east,  the  home  of  English,  a  prominent  Soft  leader  and  later 
a  candidate  against  Benton  for  the  United  States  Senate. 
The  third  was  in  the  Northwest,  the  home  of  Senator  At- 
chison and  A.  A.  King,  a  prominent  Soft,  a  Circuit  Judge  and 
later  Governor  of  the  State. 

In  the  Northwest  the  Anti-Clique  feeling  seemed  to  be 
stronger  than  in  any  other  part  of  the  State  outside  of  St. 
Louis.  Three  of  the  five  counties  from  which  radically  Soft 
resolutions  were  reported  were  in  that  section  of  the  State. 
Two  of  the  Soft  papers,  The  Liberty  Banner  and  The  Grand 
River  Chronicle,  were  located  there.  General  Atchison, 
without  doubt  the  most  prominent  man  among  the  Softs, 
lived  in  Clinton  county.  Atchison's  later  prominence  makes 
it  advisable  to  examine  the  evidence  of  his  Soft  tendencies. 
The  evidence  is  largely  indirect  as  there  is  no  statement  of 
his  position  made  by  himself  at  this  time.  There  is  enough 
indirect  evidence,  however,  to  settle  beyond  any  reasonable 
doubt  his  position.  Penn  in  an  editorial  asked  the  editor  of 
The  Inquirer  if  he  would  support  any  one  of  a  number  of  men, 
including  Atchison,  for  governor,  the  men  named  being  Softs. 
The  Statesman,  a  Whig  paper,  gave  an  account  of  a  meeting 
held  in  Clinton  county,  a  radically  Anti-Benton  county, 
which  proposed  Atchison  for  governor;  Switzler,  the  editor, 
in  his  comments  on  this  meeting  said  that  this  would  prove 
embarrassing  to  the  Central  Clique.  In  an  editorial  quoted 
from  the  Missourian  on  the  districting  question,  the  editor 
said:  "We  will  inform  the  Banner  that  if  the  views  of  that 
paper  accord  with  those  of  its  favorite  Senator  we  have 
reason  to  believe  there  will  be  no  material  difference  between 
us  in  regard  to  districting."  The  fact  that  Atchison  was  the 
favorite  Senator  of  the  Banner,  an  open  opponent  of  Benton, 
was  significant  as  was  also  the  evidence  of  his  position  on  the 
districting  question.  The  New  Era,^^  a  Whig  paper  published 
in  St.  Louis,  said  that  Atchison  was  a  Johnson  man;  this  also 
is  significant  though  not  conclusive;  not  all  Johnson  men 
were  anti-Benton  but  most  of  them  were.  The  Inquirer 
said:  "General  Atchison  who  has  lately  been  appointed  to  a 
seat  in  the  United  States  Senate  prefers  that  the  legislature 

•'Quoted  In  Jefferson  Inquirer,  Nov.  16,  1843. 


178  MISSOURI  HISTORICAL  REVIEW. 

should  at  the  next  session  district  the  state."  And  again: 
"General  Atchison  believes  Col.  Johnson  to  be  the  most 
available  man  for  President."  The  Missouri  Register,  the 
leading  Anti-Benton  paper  outside  of  St.  Louis,  said  editor- 
ially: "Hon.  David  R.  Atchison  has  been  appointed  to  fill 
the  vacancy  caused  by  the  death  of  Linn.  It  is  a  good  ap- 
pointment. The  judge,  unlike  Col.  Benton,  is  in  favor  of 
districting  the  state  for  the  election  of  members  to  Congress, 
is  a  true  and  liberal  Democrat.  We  have  heard  it  intimated 
that  he  was  recommended  to  the  governor  by  Col.  Benton 
as  a  suitable  man  to  be  his  colleague;  if  so,  the  Colonel  is 
deceived,  for  the  judge  is  a  Johnson  man,  goes  for  the  district 
system  and  against  the  proscription  of  any  portion  of  the 
Democratic  party,  which  is  more  than  we  can  say  for  Col. 
Benton".*"  Finally,  good  evidence  is  found  in  the  manner 
in  which  the  appointment  of  Atchison  was  received  in  the 
Northwest.  A  correspondent  writing  in  the  Liberty  Banner 
after  describing  the  joy  in  that  section  over  the  appointment 
of  Atchison  said:  "Governor  Reynolds  in  this  act  has  gone 
far  to  secure  the  gratitude  of  the  whole  upper  Missouri,  he 
has  acted  justly,  wisely,  and  well.  He  has  done  more  by 
this  act,  to  put  down  the  rising  indignation  of  the  people, 
against  the  so-called  Central  Clique — he  has  done  more  to 
prove  that  there  is  no  such  thing,  or  that  it  exists  no  longer, 
than  a  thousand  semi-official  bulletins  of  The  Inquirer.  We 
of  the  upper  country  hail  this  as  an  omen  of  peace  and  good 
will."  " 

Fourth,  the  final  contest  for  the  control  of  the  Party 
machinery  was  fought  in  the  State  Convention  assembled 
at  Jefferson  City  the  first  Monday  in  April,  1844.  It  is  im- 
possible to  get  the  details  of  the  conflict  there.  They  were 
purposely  concealed.  In  the  published  report  of  the  con- 
vention no  resolution,  motion,  or  measure  of  any  kind  that 
failed  to  obtain  a  majority  vote  was  mentioned.  This  action 
was  in  accordance  with  a  resolution  of  instruction  to  the 
secretary  of  the  convention.  No  record  of  division  on  any 
resolution  or  other  question,  except  the  vote  on  the  can- 

"Missouri  Register,  Oct.  17,  1843. 

"Liberty  Banner,  quoted  in  Jefferson  Inquirer,  Nov.  16,  1843. 


EARLY  OPPOSITION  TO  THOMAS  HART  BENTON,  179 

didates  for  governor,  involving  the  relative  strength  of  the 
two  factions  has  been  found.  All  that  is  certain  is  that  the 
Hards  obtained  control  of  the  Convention  and  tabled  all 
resolutions  relating  to  districting,  constitutional  convention, 
currency,  etc.,  and  then  forbade  the  secretary  to  publish 
the  record  of  the  vote  by  which  these  measures  were  tabled .^^ 
The  strength  of  the  two  factions  seems  to  have  been  nearly 
equal  in  the  Convention.  If  the  Soft  delegations  from  St. 
Louis  and  Benton  county  had  not  been  unseated  it  is  prob- 
able the  Softs  would  have  controlled  the  Convention  instead 
of  the  Hards.  As  it  was,  a  compromise  candidate,  Edwards 
of  Cole  county,  a  strong  supporter  of  Benton  but  in  accord 
with  the  Softs  on  all  the  State  issues,  was  nominated  for 
Governor.  The  Hards  compelled  their  candidate,  Marma- 
duke,  of  Saline,  to  withdraw  and  supported  Edwards  and 
nominated  him  over  King,  Soft  candidate  from  the  North- 
west, by  a  vote  of  sixty-six  to  forty-two.  The  Convention 
refused  to  take  any  position  on  the  State  questions.  So  far 
as  issues  were  concerned  its  resolutions  mentioned  national 
questions  only.  The  resolutions  contained  a  brief  endorse- 
ment of  Atchison  and  the  Congressional  delegation,  which 
Loughborough,  a  member  of  the  Convention  from  Clay 
county,  said  (in  an  article  in  the  Liberty  BannerY^  was  not  in 
the  original  draft.  The  principal  resolution  was  the  one 
endorsing  Benton.  It  read  as  follows:  "Resolved,  that  the 
public  course  of  Thomas  H.  Benton,  as  United  States  Senator 
from  Missouri;  his  patriotic  measures  to  increase  the  supply 
of  constitutional  currency — to  establish  the  subtreasury — 
to  graduate  the  price  of  public  land — to  extend  and  make 
permanent  the  right  of  pre-emption — to  abolish  bounties  on 
exports  and  duties  on  salt,  and  to  provide  for  taking  posses- 
sion of  Oregon — his  stern  opposition  to  the  increase  or  ex- 
tension of  chartered  monopolies— to  the  fraudulent  bank- 
rupt law — his  war  to  the  knife  on  the  Bank  of  the  United 
States — his  gallant  defense  and  successful  vindication  of 
President  Jackson  from  the  recorded  slanders  of  the  Federal 
parties,  slanders  which  on  his  motion  the  people  of  the  United 

*^Missouri  Register,  Apr.  16,  1844. 
"Missouri  Register,  copied.  Apr.  30.  1844. 


180  MISSOURI  HISTORICAL  REVIEW. 

States  ordered  to  be  expunged,  entitle  him  to  the  unreserved 
respect,  esteem,  and  confidence  of  the  Democratic  party  of 
Missouri."^*  There  was  also  a  clause  in  the  Atchison  resolu- 
tion, "that  we  recommend  to  the  Democracy  of  Missouri 
not  to  vote  for  any  candidate  for  the  legislature  who  will  not 
pledge  himself,  if  elected,  to  vote  for  the  election  of  Thomas 
H.  Benton  and  David  R.  Atchison  as  United  States  Senators 
from  Missouri." 

The  proceedings,  resolutions,  and  nominees  of  the  con- 
vention make  it  clear  that  the  fight  was  preeminently  a  "Ben- 
ton or  no  Benton"  fight.  On  a  platform  that  did  not  mention 
state  issues,  the  Benton  men  gave  the  Softs  candidates  for 
governor  and  lieutenant  governor  who  had  publicly  advo- 
cated districting,  a  constitutional  convention,  and  had  pub- 
licly expressed  themselves  against  the  penalties  of  the  cur- 
rency bills,  and  only  demanded  in  return  party  loyalty,  close 
organization  and  strong  support  for  Benton.  But  the  Hards 
had  secured  possession  of  the  party  name,  the  title  to  party 
regularity ;  and  in  doing  so  had  obtained  an  engine  of  political 
warfare  whose  power  was  to  receive  its  first  demonstration  in 
Missouri  in  the  ensuing  campaign. 

CAMPAIGN    AND    ELECTION,    1843-1844. 

The  Democratic  state  convention  adjourned  April  4, 
and  soon  the  delegates  had  carried  the  story  of  the  convention 
to  their  home  counties.  The  suppressing  in  the  official  pro- 
ceedings of  all  resolutions  and  motions  which  did  not  carry 
seemed  to  make  little  difference  so  far  as  the  spreading  of  the 
news  of  these  things  was  concerned.  The  Softs  who  called 
themselves  "Liberal  Democrats"  immediately  began  publish- 
ing caustic  criticisms  of  the  convention  proceedings.  Special 
emphasis  was  placed  upon  "Gag  law"  and  the  use  of  the  pre- 
vious question.  The  convention  was  severely  criticised  for 
not  taking  a  position  upon  State  issues.  It  was  referred  to 
as  a  "mum"  convention  and  much  was  made  of  its  mum 
policy.  A  third  general  line  of  criticism  was  directed  against 
the  convention's  attitude  toward  Benton. 

"Missouri  Register,  Apr.  16,  1844. 


EARLY  OPPOSITION  TO  THOMAS  HART  BENTON.  181 

While  there  seems  to  have  been  a  great  deal  of  dissatis- 
faction among  the  Democrats  concerning  the  convention's 
action,  yet  there  was  no  organized  effort  to  hold  a  convention 
of  the  Anti-Benton  men.  Probably  the  failure  to  make  any 
effort  to  hold  a  convention  was  due  to  the  fact  that  the  con- 
vention as  a  method  of  placing  candidates  before  the  people 
was  comparitively  new  and  a  great  many  doubted  the  wisdom 
of  it.^  Many  people  considered  it  similar  to  the  much  dis- 
credited caucus,  and  very  likely  the  Democrats  who  were 
disgruntled  would  be  appealed  to  more  easily  by  a  ticket 
presented  by  the  personal  initiative  of  the  candidates  than 
by  one  put  in  the  field  by  a  hastily  called  convention. 

Judge  C.  H.  Allen,  a  strong  anti-Central  Clique  man, 
had  announced  himself  as  an  independent  candidate  for, gov- 
ernor, at  least  three  months  before  the  convention.®^  Can- 
didates began  to  announce  for  the  various  offices  in  rapid 
succession  as  the  news  of  the  convention's  action  spread  over 
the  State.  So  many  announced  that  it  became  necessary  to 
have  an  understanding  among  them  to  prevent  more  than 
one  man  from  running  for  the  same  office.  This  was  ac- 
complished by  correspondence  and  conferences  among  the 
leading'  Softs.  To  arrange  the  ticket  was  a  very  difficult 
task.  Sometimes  the  real  leaders  were  compelled  to  with- 
draw in  order  to  prevent  a  multiplicity  of  candidates.  Thus 
Carty  Wells,  later  president  of  the  Constitutional  Conven- 
tion, who  had  announced  for  Congress  from  the  Northeast, 
had  to  withdraw  for  Ratcliff  Boon.®''  By  the  end  of  May  the 
ticket  had  been  arranged.  The  Missouri  Register,  the  first 
paper  to  place  the  ticket  at  the  head  of  its  editorial  column 
as  the  Liberal  Democratic  ticket,  came  out,  May  22,  with  a 
full  ticket  as  follows:  Governor,  C.  H.  Allen;  Lieutenant 
Governor,  Wm.  B.  Almond;  for  Congress,  Leonard  H.  Simms, 
of  Greene  county;  Thomas  B.  Hudson,  of  St.  Louis;  Ratcliff 
Boon,  of  Pike  county;  John  Thornton,  of  Clay  county;  and 
Augustus  Jones,  of  Washington  county.  The  Missouri 
Register  said,  "We  place  at  the  head  of  our  column  this  week 

"St.  Louis  Republican.  Dec.  23,  1843. 

"Ibid. 

*^Jefferson  Inquirer,  Apr.  18,  1844. 


182  MISSOURI  HISTORICAL  REVIEW. 

the  Independent  Democratic  ticket  as  it  appears  to  have 
been  settled  upon  by  the  Liberal  Democratic  party  of  the 
state."  Other  candidates  soon  withdrew  and  the  lines 
became  definitely  drawn  between  the  two  Democratic  tickets. 

The  Whigs  had  early  decided  not  to  run  a  State  or  Con- 
gressional ticket,  but  to  concentrate  their  efforts  upon  the 
legislative  ticket  and  attempt  to  carry  the  legislature  and 
beat  Benton.®*  The  Whig  press  assumed  the  attitude  of 
disinterested  spectators  and  repeatedly  urged  their  followers 
not  to  participate  in  the  contest  between  the  two  Democratic 
tickets.*^  However,  the  Whigs  generally  supported  the  Soft 
Democratic  ticket  with  the  connivance  and  through  the 
direction  of  the  Democratic  leaders. 

The  Hard  Democrats  emphatically  denied  the  assertion 
of  the  Whig  and  Soft  press  that  the  convention  was  against 
a  constitutional  convention,  against  the  district  system,  and 
in  favor  of  currency  bills.  They  declared  that  the  convention 
had  not  gone  on  record  for  or  against  these  questions,  but 
had  simply  refused  to  consider  them  as  vital  issues  or  tests 
of  Democratic  principles,  that  the  candidates  had  been  se- 
lected without  regard  to  these  questions;  but,  as  a  matter  of 
fact,  both  Mr.  Edwards  and  Mr.  Young,  candidates  for  Gov- 
ernor and  Lieutenant  Governor,  were  in  favor  of  a  constitu- 
tional convention  and  districting,  and  against  the  penalties 
and  test  oaths  of  the  currency  bills. ^° 

This  position  practically  took  away  from  the  Independ- 
ents their  issues,  and  confined  them  to  opposition  to  Benton, 
the  only  issue  upon  which  the  Regulars  would  disagree  with 
them.  The  chief  arguments  of  the  Regulars  were  those  of 
party  loyalty.  Treachery,  traitor  candidates,  traitor  papers, 
and  traitor  party  were  common  expressions.^^  These  profes- 
sions and  charges  were  met  by  the  Independents  with  charges 
of  egotism,  dictation,  and  tyranny  against  Benton;  with  edi- 
torials upon  "pains  and  penalties,  test  oaths,  and  proscrip- 
tion;" with  charges  of  insincerity  and  hypocrisy  against  the 

"Statesman,  Sept.  1,  1843. 

"Ibid.,  Apr.  5,  1844. 

^*Jeffers<m  Inquirer,  Apr.  11,  1844. 

^'Missouri  Register ,  June  11,  25,  1844. 


EARLY  OPPOSITION  TO  THOMAS  HART  BENTON.  183 

Hards  in  their  attitude  of  districting,  a  constitutional  con- 
vention, and  currency  bills. 

Party  organization  was  used  effectively  and  some  re- 
markable changes  began  to  take  place.  The  Grand  River 
Chronicle,  published  at  Chillicothe,  had  all  along  been  with 
Penn,  but  after  the  convention  it  came  out  for  the  regular 
nominees  and  said  the  Independents  would  get  little  encour- 
agement in  that  section. ^^  Even  in  St.  Louis  a  meeting 
called  by  the  Penn  faction  adopted  resolutions  declaring 
allegiance  to  the  nominees  of  the  Democratic  state  conven- 
tion. 

The  Anti-Benton  men  claimed  that  Benton,  secretly,  was 
not  loyal  to  the  national  Democratic  ticket  for  which  they 
professed  great  enthusiasm.  Benton's  strong  preference  for 
Van  Buren  was  well  known  in  Missouri.  Soon  after  Polk's 
nomination  Benton  wrote  a  letter  to  the  Missourian,  in- 
tending it  to  be  published  for  the  benefit  of  Polk  and  Dallas, 
in  which  he  said:  "Neither  Mr.  Polk  nor  Mr.  Dallas  have  had 
anything  to  do  with  the  intrigue  which  has  nullified  the  choice 
of  the  people  *****  and  neither  of  them  should  be  in- 
jured or  prejudiced  by  it.  *  *  *  *  The  people  now  as  twenty 
years  ago  will  teach  the  Congress  intriguers  to  attend  to  law 
making  and  let  president  making  and  unmaking  alone  in 
the  future."  ^^  "The  Texas  treaty  which  consummated  their 
intrigue  was  nothing  but  the  final  act  in  a  long  conspiracy 
in  which  the  sacrifice  of  Mr.  Van  Buren  had  been  previously 
agreed  upon."  The  Softs  attacked  Benton's  letter  dwelling 
especially  upon  the  words  "intrigue"  and  "Congress  intri- 
guers." In  an  editorial  in  The  Missouri  Register  Benton  was 
made  to  say  that  Polk  and  Dallas  were  nominated  by  Congress 
intriguers.  The  editor  then  said:  "If  they  are  the  tools  of 
intriguers  neither  Benton  nor  anybody  else  can  con- 
scientiously support  them.  The  receiver  of  stolen  goods  is 
as  bad  as  the  thief." 

^* Jefferson  Inquirer,  May  2,  1844. 
^'Missouri  Register,  June  26,  1844. 


184  MISSOURI  HISTORICAL  REVIEW. 

BENTON  AND  TEXAS. 

But  the  chief  attacks  upon  Benton  in  the  latter  part  of 
the  campaign  and  the  ones  which  seemed  to  have  the  greatest 
effect  were  those  directed  against  his  attitude  upon  the  an- 
nexation of  Texas.  Benton  had  that  western  spirit  of  ex- 
pansion which  caused  him  to  resent  the  loss  of  a  single  foot 
of  territory  and  made  him  always  ready  to  see  any  territory 
acquired  that  could  be  obtained  with  honor.  He  had  op- 
posed the  treaty  of  1819,  in  a  series  of  articles  signed  Ameri- 
canus  and  published  in  the  St.  Louis  Inquirer,  because  it 
gave  Texas  to  Spain.  In  another  series  published  in  the 
St.  Louis  Beacon  in  1829,  signed  La  Salle,  he  advocated  the 
acquisition  of  Texas  and  he  always  favored  the  annexation 
of  Texas  at  any  time  that  it  could  be  brought  about  without 
compromising  the  honor  of  the  Country. 

In  1844  the  Tyler  administration  negotiated  a  treaty 
with  the  republic  of  Texas  which  provided  for  its  annexation 
to  the  United  States.  The  prospect  of  getting  Texas  was 
hailed  with  delight  in  Missouri,  but  to  the  surprise  of  every 
one,  friends  and  enemies  alike,  Benton  came  out  against  the 
ratification  of  the  treaty.  Why  he  took  such  a  position  im- 
mediately became  a  matter  of  controversy.  His  enemies 
claimed  that  he  was  actuated  by  contemptible  motives  of 
jealousy  of  Calhoun,  and  that  his  arguments  against  the  treaty 
were  without  a  basis  of  fact.  His  friends  said  that  the  treaty 
was  really  bad  and  that  Benton  had  not  only  the  knowledge 
of  conditions  and  the  foresight  to  enable  him  to  see  the  bad 
features  and  the  motives  back  of  them,  but  that  he  also  had 
the  courage  and  the  manhood  to  expose  them.^*  Benton 
certainly  displayed  courage  in  taking  the  position  that  he 
did  against  annexation  at  that  time.  Everyone  knew  that 
annexation  was  exceedingly  popular  in  Missouri,  and  no  one 
knew  it  better  than  did  Benton.  He  knew  also  that  he  had  a 
tremendous  conflict  on  his  hands  in  Missouri  in  which  his 
very  political  existence  was  at  stake. 

Benton  said  that  the  treaty  was  "a  scheme,  on  the  part 
of  some  of  its  movers,  to  dissolve  the  union — on  the  part  of 

^*Jefferson  Inquirer,  July  4,  1844. 


EARLY  OPPOSITION  TO  THOMAS  HART  BENTON.  185 

some  others,  an  intrigue  for  the  presidency — and  on  the  part 
of  others  a  land  speculation  and  a  job  in  script."  He  de- 
clared that  to  ratify  the  treaty  meant  war  with  Mexico. 
He  was  very  much  averse  to  war  with  Mexico  and  was  es- 
pecially anxious  to  cultivate  friendly  trade  relations.  Prob- 
ably his  jealousy  of  and  opposition  to  Calhoun  tended  to 
cause  him  to  oppose  the  treaty;  certainly,  his  knowledge  of 
the  Spanish  land  grants  and  the  claims  based  upon  them 
enabled  him  to  see  the  defects  of  the  treaty  in  this  respect; 
and  his  ardent  devotion  to  the  Union  caused  him  to  oppose 
what  he  thot  was  a  scheme  to  dissolve  it;  but  no  doubt  his 
chief  reason  for  opposing  the  treaty  was  that  it  would  bring 
on  a  war  with  Mexico.  In  this  last  objection,  at  least,  later 
events  proved  that  his  judgment  was  correct.  The  treaty, 
largely  thru  Benton's  efforts,  failed  of  ratification  in  the 
Senate  of  the  United  States.  He  then  introduced  a  bill  pro- 
viding for  the  annexation  of  Texas  by  a  method  which  he 
said  would  avoid  war  with  Mexico.''^ 

But  why  should  Benton  be  so  averse  to  a  war  with  Mexico? 
He  did  not  ordinarily  avoid  a  fight.  No  true  westerner  did, 
and  probably  the  one  ambition  of  his  life  was  to  become  a 
military  hero.  His  peculiar  aversion  to  war  with  Mexico  at 
this  time  can  only  be  understood  when  we  view  the  situation 
from  the  viewpoint  of  Benton's  fundamental  public  policy. 
There  can  be  no  doubt  but  that  Benton's  dominant  interest 
in  public  questions  was  centered  around  the  currency  problem. 
Soon  after  the  failure  of  the  Territorial  Bank  of  Missouri,  of 
which  he  had  been  a  director,  Benton  had  taken  a  strong 
position  in  favor  of  gold  and  silver  as  the  constitutional 
currency  of  the  country ;  ^^  he  had  been  the  real  moving  spirit 
behind  Jackson  in  the  beginning  as  well  as  thruout  the  fight 
against  the  second  Bank  of  the  United  States.^^  He  had 
secured  the  change  of  ratio  between  gold  and  silver  that  had 
caused  gold  to  circulate.*^^  He  had  suggested  and  always 
worked  diligently  for  the  sub-treasury.^^    He  had  proposed 

■"Congressional  Globe,  Vol.  13.  (Session  1843  and  44)  p.  474. 

^'Statesman,  Jan.  19.  1844. 

^■•Thirty  Years'  View,  Vol.  I.  pp.  1583. 

^'Laughlin's  Principles  of  Money,  pp.  427fif. 

'•Tfttrty  Years'  View,  Vol.  I.  pp.  168ff. 


186  MISSOURI  HISTORICAL  REVIEW. 

to  tax  the  currency  of  the  state  banks  out  of  existence.'"  In 
a  speech,  in  1840,  which  was  reprinted  in  The  Inquirer  in 
1843,  just  after  he  had  visited  Jefferson  City,  Benton  said, 
"The  currency  question  is  the  greatest  question  of  the  age," 
and  later  in  the  same  speech,  "I  repeat  it,  the  currency 
question  is  the  great  question  of  the  age;  it  absorbs  and 
swallows  up  every  other."  And  it  was  his  attempt  to  put 
into  practice  his  currency  ideas  in  the  State  of  Missouri  that 
had  involved  him  in  a  fight  to  the  bitter  end  for  his  political 
existence.  Benton's  position  on  the  Texas  treaty  and  his 
aversion  to  the  war  which  he  believed  would  follow  its  ratifi- 
cation becomes  clear  when  it  is  viewed  from  the  standpoint 
of  its  effect  upon  the  currency  situation  in  the  United  States 
and  especially  in  the  West. 

The  great  obstacle  to  Benton's  currency  schemes  was 
the  lack  of  sufficient  hard  money  for  circulation.  He  had 
always  claimed  that  the  hard  money  would  come  if  the  small 
notes  were  not  allowed  to  circulate.  Hence,  his  effort  to 
have  the  legislature  of  Missouri  prohibit  under  heavy  penalties 
the  circulation  of  small  notes  in  Missouri,  But  if  small  notes 
were  not  to  circulate  gold  and  silver  must  be  obtained  to 
circulate  in  the  place  of  them.  Where  was  it  to  come  from? 
Benton  looked  to  Mexico  for  much  of  it. 

In  a  speech  in  the  Senate  on  his  bill  for  the  admission  of 
Texas  he  urged  as  the  chief  claim  for  the  superiority  of  his 
bill  over  the  treaty  that  it  would  avoid  the  war  with  Mexico, 
which  the  treaty  would  have  caused.  After  showing  that 
such  a  war  would  be  unjust  and  dishonorable  he  said,  "Policy 
and  interest  if  not  justice  and  honor,  should  make  us  refrain 
from  this  war.  We  have,  or  rather  had,  a  great  commerce 
with  Mexico,  which  deserves  protection  instead  of  destruc- 
tion. Our  trade  with  this  country  commenced  with  the  first 
year  of  her  independence — 1821 — and  we  received  from  her 
that  year  $80,000  in  specie.  It  increased  annually  and 
vastly  and  in  the  year  1835,  the  year  before  the  revolution, 
this  import  increased  to  $8,343,181  on  the  custom  house 
books  beside  the  amounts  not  entered. ^^     Our  sympathy  and 

"Congressional  Globe,  Vol.  10,  (1841-42)  27th  Congress,  pp.  81ff. 
"Congressional  Globe,  Vol.  13,  (1843-44)  pp.  474-497. 


EARLY  OPPOSITION  TO  THOMAS  HART  BENTON.  187 

supposed  aid  to  the  Texans  lost  us  the  favor  of  the  Mexicans, 
and  the  imports  ran  down  in  seven  years  to  $1,342,817. 
New  Orleans,  and  thru  her,  the  great  West,  was  the  greatest 
gainer  by  this  import  while  it  flourished — and  of  course  the 
greatest  looser  when  it  declined;  and  instead  of  destroying 
the  remainder  of  it,  and  all  commerce  with  our  nearest 
neighbor,  by  an  unjust  assumption  of  war  against  her,  we 
should  rather  choose  to  restore  this  specie  import  to  its  former 
maximum  and  increase  it.  We  should  rather  choose  to  cherish 
and  improve  a  valuable  trade  with  a  neighbor  that  has  mines, 
and  whose  staple  is  silver.  Atlantic  politicians  hot  in  the 
pursuit  of  Texas  may  have  no  sympathy  for  this  Mexican 
trade,  but  I  have;  and  it  has  been  my  policy  to  reconcile 
these  two  objects — acquisition  of  Texas  and  the  preservation 
of  Mexican  trade — and,  therefore,  to  eschew  unjust  war 
with  Mexico  as  not  only  wicked  but  foolish."  Benton  in  his 
letter  to  the  Texas  Congress  dated  May  2,  1844,  in  which 
he  urged  the  desirability  of  annexation  without  war,  used 
the  same  arguments  and  stressed  the  import  of  gold  and 
silver  into  the  United  States. 

But  these  as  well  as  all  other  arguments  appeared  to 
fall  upon  deaf  ears  so  far  as  Missouri  Democrats  were  con- 
cerned. Even  The  Jefferson  Inquirer,  probably  the  strongest 
Benton  paper  in  the  state,  in  the  same  issue  in  which  it  pub- 
lished Benton's  letter  to  the  Texan  Congress  had  an  editorial 
a  column  in  length  advocating  the  immediate  annexation  of 
Texas.  The  Missouri  Register's  columns  were  full  of  at- 
tacks upon  Benton  because  of  his  position  on  the  Texas 
treaty,  for  three  months  before  the  election.  He  was  ac- 
cused of  being  a  traitor  to  his  country  and  to  the  West  in 
particular,  of  being  in  alliance  with  the  British,  and  of  going 
over  to  the  Whigs.  The  letters  of  Clay,  Van  Buren,  and 
Benton,  all  opposing  immediate  annexation,  were  compared 
and  attacked  bitterly,  especially  that  of  Benton.^^ 

Public  meetings  were  held  in  many  places,  and  resolu- 
tions were  passed  demanding  immediate  annexation.  C.  F. 
Jackson  and  Judge  Rawlins  of  Howard  county,  candidates, 
one  for  the  House  and  the  other  for  the  State  Senate,  and 

"Missouri  Register,  May  14,  1844. 


188  MISSOURI  HISTORICAL  REVIEW. 

both  old  political  friends  and  supporters  of  Benton,  and  leaders 
in  the  Fayette  Clique,  declared  publicly  in  their  campaign 
that  they  "would  not  vote  for  Benton  or  any  other  man  for 
the  United  States  Senate  who  was  opposed  to  the  immediate 
annexation  of  Texas."  ^  The  Whigs  approved  of  Benton's 
course  on  the  Texan  treaty,  but  this  Whig  endorsement 
served  only  as  a  further  handicap  to  Benton  in  the  eyes  of 
all  good  Democrats. 

In  the  face  of  all  this  opposition  Benton  did  not  flinch 
or  waver  on  his  position.  He  came  to  Missouri  as  soon  as 
Congress  adjourned  and  made  a  speaking  tour  in  which  he 
spoke  at  St.  Louis,  Jefferson  City,  Boonville,  and  other  points 
and  always  explained  the  Texas  question  and  why  he  opposed 
the  treaty.  The  speech  at  Boonville  delivered  at  a  great 
Democratic  campaign  rally  July  17,  1844,  is  typical  of  his 
campaign  speeches  during  this  summer.  He  first  declared 
his  personal  disinterestedness  in  the  election.  He  said  that 
it  was  more  becoming  of  him  to  thank  the  people  of  Missouri 
for  having  elected  him  four  times  to  the  Senate  of  the  United 
States,  than  to  ask  for  a  fifth  election,  that  he  was  not  a 
candidate  but  that  he  left  his  interest  in  the  hands  of  his 
friends,  the  Hards.  He  then  proceeded  to  discuss  the  Texas 
question  and  called  on  all  present  who  had  lived  in  Missouri 
in  1819  to  witness  that  he  had  been  the  first  to  write  and  speak 
against  giving  Texas  away  and  the  first  to  suggest  annexa- 
tion. He  then  proceeded  in  great  detail  to  give  an  account 
of  the  making  of  the  treaty  of  1819,  and  fastened  upon 
Calhoun  the  responsibility  for  giving  Texas  away.  He  next 
made  an  extensive  argument  against  the  treaty  for  annexa- 
tion negotiated  by  Calhoun,  denouncing  it  as  "a  carefully 
and  artfully  contrived  plan  to  dissolve  the  Union."  He  fol- 
lowed this  with  an  elaborate  argument  in  favor  of  his  bill 
and  the  importance  of  getting  Texas  without  war  with 
Mexico,  which  he  said  would  be  accomplished  by  his  measure. 

Benton's  stand  on  the  Texas  treaty  must  have  lost  him 
a  good  deal  of  support.  It  gave  those  politicians  who  were 
getting  tired  of  his  leadership,  or  who  were  secretly  opposed 
to  him  a  chance  to  come  out  in  opposition  to  him  on  a  popular 

"Missouri  Register,  June  11,  1844. 


EARLY  OPPOSITION  TO  THOMAS  HART  BENTON.  189 

question.  Probably  C.  F.  Jackson  represented  one  of  these 
types  and  Atchison  the  other.  Jackson  openly  came  out 
against  Benton  on  annexation  and  declared  that  he  would 
not  vote  for  him  if  elected  to  the  legislature,  but  there  is  no 
evidence  that  Atchison  opposed  the  reelection  of  Benton. 
He  seems  to  have  stood  aloof  from  the  fight  after  his  appoint- 
ment to  the  United  States  Senate,  but  he  boldly  took  a  posi- 
tion against  Benton  on  the  treaty  when  it  was  being  con- 
sidered in  the  Senate. 

At  this  time  the  election  for  State  officers  and  Congress- 
men was  held  early  in  August.  At  this  election  the  regular 
Democratic  candidate  for  Governor,  Edwards,  was  elected 
by  a  majority  of  5621  over  the  independent  candidate,  Allen. 
The  Whigs  elected  forty-four  members  in  the  House  as  against 
twenty-six  in  the  previous  house.  The  General  Assembly 
now  stood  fifty-three  Whigs  and  eighty  Democrats,  a  total 
of  one  hundred  and  thirty-three  members.  Sixty-seven  votes 
were  required  to  elect  a  senator.  The  Democrats  had  a  clear 
majority  of  thirteen  but  no  one  knew  how  many  Democrats 
were  Anti-Benton.  The  Whigs  made  considerable  inroads 
upon  the  Democratic  strongholds  especially  in  the  contests 
for  members  of  the  legislature.  They  even  secured  two  of 
the  three  representatives  from  Howard  county,  the  home  of 
the  Central  Clique,  and  it  may  have  been  that  Jackson's 
opposition  to  Benton  on  the  Texas  question  was  what  saved 
him.  The  Missouri  Register  claimed  an  Anti-Benton  majority 
of  four  votes. ^  The  Reporter  claimed  Benton  was  beaten 
by  eight  votes. ^^  On  the  other  hand  The  Inquirer  claimed 
Benton's  election  by  from  sixteen  to  twenty  votes.*^  Thus 
the  August  election  did  not  determine  the  contest. 

The  anti-Benton  Democrats  redoubled  their  efforts  after 
the  election.  Every  issue  of  their  press  was  full  of  attacks 
upon  Benton.  With  the  State  campaign  over,  the  editorials 
turned  more  on  national  issues.  All  kinds  of  efforts  were 
made  to  cast  reflection  on  Benton  and  bring  him  into  disre- 
pute.    The  charge  that  Benton  was  really  against  the  national 

"Missouri  Register,  Aug.  27,  1844. 

**Missouri  Reporter,  quoted  in  the  Statesman,  Sept.  6,  1844. 

**Jefferson  Inquirer,  Aug.  16.  1844. 


190  MISSOURI  HISTORICAL  REVIEW. 

ticket  was  renewed.  The  Reporter  quoted  Benton  as  re- 
plying to  a  compromise  proposition  that  was  made  to  him  at 
the  National  Democratic  Convention  at  Baltimore  to  the 
effect  that  Mr.  Van  Buren  withdraw,  by  saying,  "I  will  see 
the  Democratic  party  sink  fifty  fathoms  deep  into  the  middle 
of  hell-fire  before  I  will  give  one  inch  with  Mr.  Van  Buren. 
If  we  cannot  obtain  victory  with  Mr.  Van  Buren  we  do  not 
want  victory  and  will  not  have  it."*^ 

Benton  was  assailed  for  not  living  in  the  State.  "Mis- 
souri," it  was  said,  "has  long  been  a  kind  of  political  prin- 
cipality for  him,  while  his  residence  has  been  in  Virginia 
and  Kentucky."  *^  The  violence  of  the  contest  was  shown 
by  personal  attacks  made  on  Benton.  His  vote  was  chal- 
lenged in  St.  Louis  by  a  Whig  who  asserted  that  Benton  did 
not  live  in  the  State,  and  he  was  compelled  to  swear  that  St. 
Louis  was  his  residence.  Col.  Benton  had  been  a  director 
in  the  old  Territorial  Bank  of  Missouri,  which  had  failed  in 
1819.  Some  one  got  a  judgment  against  the  Bank  and  after 
having  failed  to  get  the  money  had  Benton  arrested  for  debt. 
He  was  compelled  to  plead  privilege  from  arrest  as  a  member 
of  Congress.  This  was  done  in  1843  and  repeated  in  Sep- 
tember 1844.  The  Missouri  Register  without  any  explana- 
tion of  the  nature  of  the  debt  said,  "Col.  Benton  arrived  in 
St.  Louis  the  first  of  the  week  and  the  sheriff  served  a  writ 
for  debt  on  him  the  next  day  after  he  arrived.  Is  it  not 
strange  that  Col.  Benton  should  be  thus  used?  Certainly  it 
is  no  credit  to  him,  much  less  to  the  state  of  Missouri  after 
it  has  fattened  him  for  a  quarter  of  a  century."  ^^  Such  was 
the  character  of  the  attacks  made  on  Benton  between  August 
first,  the  date  of  the  election  of  the  legislature,  and  its  as- 
sembly in  the  latter  part  of  November. 

Petitions  were  quietly  circulated  in  some  counties  ad- 
dressed to  the  legislator  asking  him  to  vote  for  some  good 
Democrat  instead  of  Benton.^"  One  of  these  was  circulated 
in  Osage  county.     A  correspondent  of  The  Inquirer  said  that 

'^Reporter,  quoted  in  the  Missouri  Register,  Aug.  27,  1844. 
"Missouri  Register,  Sept.  10,  1844. 
"Missouri  Register,  Oct.  1,  1844. 
"Jefferson  Inquirer,  Sept.  26,  1844. 


EARLY  OPPOSITION  TO  THOMAS  HART  BENTON.  191 

what  the  Softs  could  not  effect  by  open  warfare,  he  feared 
some  more  insidious,  was  endeavoring  to  effect  by  strategy, 
which  was  only  Softism  in  a  new  form.  The  former  was  an 
undisguised  attack  upon  Col.  Benton  for  the  avowed  object 
of  his  political  destruction;  the  latter  was  slyly  and  subtly 
spreading  the  poison  of  disaffection.  He  said  the  annexa- 
tion of  Texas  was  the  avowed  object  of  the  opposition  but 
in  reality  their  purpose  was  the  elevation  of  political  in- 
triguers. When  the  above  statements  are  considered  in  con- 
nection with  C.  F.  Jackson's  active  opposition  to  Benton  on 
the  Texas  question,  and  the  fact  that  Osage  county  was  a 
Hard  county  and  had  always  adhered  to  the  Central  Clique 
it  would  seem  that  there  was  not  only  good  grounds  for 
questioning  Jackson's  loyalty  to  Benton  but  also  strong 
reasons  for  condemning  his  motives  for  and  methods  of  oppo- 
sition, if  the  inference  that  he  was  the  political  intriguer  in 
whose  behalf  the  papers  of  instruction  were  being  circulated 
was  true. 

In  Benton's  speeches  on  Texas  he  had  always  declared 
himself  in  favor  of  annexation  at  the  earliest  practicable 
moment.  Texas  meetings  where  Benton's  friends  prevailed 
adopted  resolutions  using  the  expression  "earliest  practicable 
moment,"  while  those  meetings  where  Benton's  friends  were 
in  a  minority  used  the  word  "immediate"  in  their  resolutions. 
C.  F.  Jackson  addressed  a  Texas  meeting  in  Randolph 
county  (one  of  the  extreme  Hard  counties  that  had  always 
lined  up  with  the  Central  Clique),  which  declared  for  the 
immediate  annexation  of  Texas,  and  also  organized  a  league 
(patterned  after  the  organization  of  a  political  party)  for 
the  purpose  of  pushing  the  immediate  annexation  without 
the  consent  of  Mexico.^^  A  great  Democratic  rally  was  held 
at  Hannibal  in  October.  Benton  was  there  and  spoke  upon 
the  annexation  of  Texas.  He  emphasized  the  necessity  of 
acquiring  Texas,  but  also  emphasized  the  desirability  of 
keeping  peace  and  building  up  our  commerce  with  Mexico. 
Later  in  the  day  his  speech  was  answered  by  C.  F,  Jackson, 

*>Ibid. 


192  MISSOURI  HISTORICAL  REVIEW. 

who  advocated  the  immediate  annexation  of  Texas  without 
the  consent  of  Mexico.** 

Benton  in  his  Hannibal  speech  referred  to  his  position 
as  being  that  of  a  supposed  candidate  for  the  United  States 
Senate.  He  mentioned  the  fact  that  he  had  spoken  of  it 
once  before  and  had  said  that  having  been  in  the  Senate  for 
twenty-five  years  he  did  not  ask  a  fifth  election,  that  he  was 
passive  and  neutral  in  the  question  and  left  the  decision  to 
his  political  friends,  the  Hards. ^  He  now  repeated  what  he 
to  be  said  at  Boonville  and  said  further  that  it  now  became  him 
to  be  more  explicit,  and  to  say  that  he  should  withdraw  his 
name  from  the  canvass  if  he  found  any  dissention  or  division 
among  his  friends.  He  would  not  be  the  cause  or  subject  of 
any  dissention  among  them.  No  such  dissention  could  take 
place  without  injury  to  the  party — without  impairing  its 
harmony  and  unity — ^without,  perhaps,  leading  to  incurable 
division;  and  this  was  a  consequence  he  was  irrevocably  de- 
termined should  never  take  place  on  his  account.  He  re- 
peated, he  would  take  care  to  have  his  name  withdrawn  if 
there  was  any  division  among  his  friends,  the  Hards,  to  whose 
decision,  in  all  other  respects  he  committed  his  fate.** 

THE   STRUGGLE   IN   THE   MISSOURI   LEGISLATURE. 

The  Senatorial  contest  was  hanging  in  the  balance.  No 
one  knew  what  the  result  would  be.  The  date  for  the  as- 
sembling of  the  Legislature  was  the  third  Monday  in  No- 
vember. Neither  side  was  very  confident  of  success.  Both 
were  on  the  alert  and  ready  to  take  advantage  of  the  slightest 
opportunity  to  secure  the  defeat  of  the  other.  As  the  date 
of  the  meeting  of  the  Legislature  drew  near  the  political 
tension  increased  There  were  reports  that  Jackson  would 
become  a  candidate  against  Benton  for  the  Senatorship.*^ 
The  politicians  gathered  early,  not  only  the  members  of  the 
Legislature  but  it  appears  that  the  Benton  men  had  as  many 
as  possible  of  their  influential  leaders  come  to  Jefferson  City 

"St.  Louis  Republican,  Oct.  5,  1844. 

"Benton's  Boonville  Speech,  published  in  The  Inquirer,  July  25,  1844. 
"Benton's  Speach  at  Hannibal  Oct.  1,  Inquirer,  Oct.  17,  1844. 
"St.  Louis  Republican,  Nov.  21,  1844. 


EARLY  OPPOSITION  TO  THOMAS  HART  BENTON.  193 

on  one  pretext  or  another  and  then  work  for  Benton  on  the 
side.  The  correspondent  of  The  Republican  said  that  there 
were  nearly  one  hundred  men  there  seeking  to  be  selected  as 
messenger  to  Washington,  D.  C,  to  carry  the  official  electoral 
vote,  all  of  them  active  Bentonians.^  There  were  many  con- 
ferences and  much  caucusing  and  at  this  kind  of  work  the 
Benton  men  proved  themselves  superior  to  their  opponents. 
What  was  accomplished  by  them  is  best  told  in  the  words  of 
the  correspondent  of  The  Republican.  Writing  before  the 
meeting  of  the  Legislature  he  said:  "Jackson  is  to  be  elected 
Speaker.  In  this  there  is  a  double  operation.  In  the  first 
place,  the  election  of  Mr.  Jackson  to  the  office  of  Speaker 
will  buy  him  off  from  contending  against  Col.  Benton  for  the 
Senatorship, — a  fear  which  has  been  pretty  widely  enter- 
tained, and  in  the  next  place,  it  once  more  manifests  the 
influence  of  the  Colonel's  favorite  measures  in  the  House.*'^ 
The  chief  clerkship  is  to  be  given  to  Mr.  Houston  as  a  reward 
for  the  part  he  played  in  support  of  the  Colonel's  currency 
measures."  Later  he  said:  "The  caucus  held  this  morning 
was  not  harmonious  but  the  offices  of  speaker,  chief  clerk, 
etc.,  were  settled.  All  applicants  were  required  to  give  a 
pledge  to  support  Col.  Benton, — Jackson  whose  reported  split 
with  Benton  on  the  Texas  question  has  been  so  rife  goes  the 
whole  figure."  ®^, 

The  Legislature  met  on  November  18th.  Jackson  was 
elected  Speaker  and  Houston  chief  clerk.  Thus  the  Hards 
controlled  the  organization.  After  the  organization  was 
effected  a  caucus  was  held  in  the  Senate  chamber.  Accord- 
ing to  the  correspondent  of  The  Republican,  "the  object  was 
to  whip  the  few  Softs  into  the  traces  and  to  obtain  their 
pledge  to  support  Col.  Benton.  The  meeting  was  by  no 
means  harmonious  and  two  or  three  withdrew  refusing  to 
pledge  themselves.  The  caucus  determined  to  bring  on  the 
election  at  an  early  day  this  week.  If  they  can  succeed  the 
election  will  probably  take  place  Wednesday  or  Thursday. 
The  opponents   of  Col.    Benton  will   attempt  to   procrasti- 

"Ibid.,  Nov.  22,  1844. 

"St.  Louis  Republican,  Nov.  21,  1844. 

"Ibid.,  Nov.  22,  1844. 


Id4  MISSOURI  HISTORICAL  REVIEW. 

nate,  and  if  they  succeed  the  Colonel's  election  may  be 
regarded  as  doubtful."  '* 

On  the  afternoon  of  the  19th,  Senator  Fort  submitted  a 
joint  resolution  "to  go  into  the  election  of  Senator  of  the  United 
States  to  supply  the  vacancy  occasioned  by  the  death  of 
Senator  Linn,  and  also  the  election  of  a  Senator  to  supply 
the  place  of  Hon.  Thomas  H.  Benton,  whose  term  of  service 
expires  on  the  4th  of  March,  1845,  on  tomorrow  at  2  o'clock 
P.  M."  Mr.  Ellis,  Democrat  from  the  senatorial  district  in 
which  Atchison  lived,  moved  to  lay  on  the  table,  which 
motion  was  lost,  yeas  fourteen,  nays  nineteen.  As  there 
were  twenty-four  Democrats  and  only  nine  Whigs  in  the 
Senate,  five  Democrats  must  have  voted  for  the  Ellis  motion 
to  table  the  resolutions.  Ellis  then  submitted  as  a  sub- 
stitute for  Fort's  resolution  a  resolution  favoring  the  imme- 
diate annexation  of  Texas.  The  president  decided  the  sub- 
stitute was  out  of  order.  Ellis  then  moved  to  amend  Fort's 
resolution  by  striking  out  all  that  portion  after  the  word 
"also."  The  effect  of  the  amendment  would  have  been  to 
elect  Atchison  at  the  joint  meeting  and  postpone  the  election 
of  Benton.  The  amendment  was  lost,  yeas  fourteen,  nays 
nineteen.  The  resolution  was  then  passed,  yeas  twenty, 
nays  thirteen. ^°° 

When  the  resolution  came  up  in  the  House,  Hough,  a 
democrat  from  Scott  county  in  Southeast  Missouri,  intro- 
duced a  series  of  resolutions,  the  purport  of  which  was  to 
approve  the  course  of  Atchison  and  to  condemn  that  of 
Benton  upon  the  Texas  question.  This  was  an  effort  to  delay 
the  action  of  the  House  upon  the  Senate  resolution  until 
after  the  time  named  for  the  joint  meeting,  but  the  Speaker 
decided  that  as  they  were  concurrent  they  should  lay  on  the 
table  one  day  before  being  considered.  Mr.  McHenry,  of 
Bates  county,  offered  the  following  resolution:  "That  the 
Senate  be  informed  that  the  House  will  be  ready  this  day 
at  2  o'clock  P.  M.  to  proceed  to  the  election  of  two  Senators 
to  the  Congress  of  the  United  States  for  the  State  of  Mis- 

"Ibid. 

"'Senate  Journal,  1844-45,  pp.  42f. 


EARLY  OPPOSITION  TO  THOMAS  HART  BENTON.  195 

souri."  *°^  Mr.  Davis,  a  Whig  from  Howard  county,  ob- 
jected to  the  consideration  of  the  resolution  as  being  out  of 
order.  The  Speaker  decided  the  consideration  of  the  resolu- 
tion to  be  in  order,  whereupon,  Davis  appealed  from  the 
decision  of  the  Speaker  to  the  House  and  demanded  the  yeas 
and  nays.  The  Speaker  was  sustained  by  a  vote  of  seventy- 
eight  to  sixteen.  Mr.  Ferryman,  Whig  from  Washington 
county,  then  moved  to  adjourn,  but  the  motion  was  lost  by 
a  vote  of  sixty  to  thirty-seven.  Mr.  Hough  then  moved  to 
postpone  the  consideration  of  Mr.  McHenry's  resolution, 
until  tomorrow  at  2  o'clock  P.  M.,  but  his  motion  was  voted 
down  fifty-five  to  forty-one  and  McHenry's  resolution  was 
adopted  by  the  same  vote.  There  were  forty-four  Whig 
members  in  the  House.  It  will  be  noted  that  in  no  instance 
during  the  fight  to  delay  the  election  of  Benton  did  the  Whigs 
cast  their  full  vote  against  the  Benton  men. 

When  the  two  houses  met  in  joint  session  Atchison  was 
nominated  for  the  short  term  by  Mr.  Fort,  leader  of  the 
Benton  men  in  the  Senate,  and  received  101  votes,  thirty- 
four  more  than  was  necessary.  For  the  long  term,  Mr. 
Monroe,  Senator  from  the  central  part  of  the  State,  nominated 
Col.  Benton;  and  Senator  Anderson,  Soft  Democrat  from  St. 
Louis,  nominated  Thos.  B.  English,  a  Soft  from  Cape  Girar- 
deau county.  Benton  received  seventy-four  votes,  English 
thirty-two,  and  the  other  votes  were  scattered.  ^°^  Benton 
had  a  margin  of  only  eight  votes  which  in  itself  is  significant 
when  it  is  remembered  that  the  Democrats  had  eighty  mem- 
bers in  the  legislature,  and  that  Atchison's  margin  was 
thirty-four.  An  analysis  of  the  vote  shows  that  two  Whigs 
voted  for  Benton  and  eight  Democrats  failed  to  vote  for 
him,  that  most  of  the  Anti-Benton  Democratic  vote  was  in 
the  Senate  and  came  from  the  holdover  Senators  and  further 
that  it  came  from  the  Northwest  and  the  Southeast. 

The  Anti-Benton  forces,  clearly,  had  failed  to  perfect 
any  coalition  whereby  they  could  cast  their  entire  vote  for 
one  man,  and  their  tactics  was  to  secure  time  for  organiza- 

'"House  Journal,  1844-45,  pp.  38-40. 
*'*Ibid. 


196  MISSOURI  HISTORICAL  REVIEW. 

tion.  On  the  other  hand  the  Democratic  organization  had 
succeeded  in  controlling  all  the  newly  elected  members  except 
three.  The  correspondent  of  The  Republican  enumerated  a 
number  who  cast  their  votes  for  Benton,  but  who,  he  said, 
should  have  voted  against  him.  Boas,  of  Ste.  Genevieve, 
had  instructions  from  his  constituents  in  his  pocket  to  vote 
against  Benton  when  he  voted  for  him;  Buford  of  Madison, 
French  of  Dade,  McClure  of  Warren,  McHenry  of  Bates, 
Salmon  of  Davis,  Smith  of  Clinton,  Warren  of  Camden, 
and  Wilson  of  Van  Buren  (Bates)  were  either  elected  on  pledges 
to  vote  against  Benton  or  as  anti-Benton  men.  Some  of 
them,  it  was  alleged,  pledged  themselves  repeatedly  on  the 
stump  to  oppose  Benton's  reelection.^°^  Here  are  nine  men 
most  of  whom,  at  least,  had  been  brought  to  the  support  of 
Col.  Benton  thru  the  pressure  of  the  organization.  Indeed 
the  power  of  the  party  organization  was  so  great  that  it  not 
only  whipped  the  Soft  members  of  the  Legislature  into  line, 
but  it  prevented  any  Soft  leader  of  prominence  from  be- 
coming an  active  candidate  against  Benton  or  even  openly 
allowing  the  use  of  his  name  for  such  a  purpose.  Thus  it 
appears  that  the  party  organization  saved  Benton  in  1844. 
The  Hard  press  was  jubilant.  The  papers  praised  Benton 
very  highly.  All  open  opposition  seemed  to  melt  away  and 
while  Benton's  victory  was  by  a  very  narrow  margin  it  ap- 
peared to  be  complete. 

>«>S«.  Louis  Republican,  Nov.  25.  1844. 


University  of  California 

SOUTHERN  REGIONAL  LIBRARY  FACILITY 

405  Hilgard  Avenue,  Los  Angeles,  CA  90024-1388 

Return  this  material  to  the  library 

from  which  it  was  borrowed. 


I  iiiifii  nil  iiiii  Hill  Hill  mil  mil  Hill  mil 
A     000  676  0! 


